Today it's only my video card information? What will it be tomorrow?
Didn;t everyone here get all pissed off about Intel putting retrievable (sp?) serial numbers on their chips? Didn;t everyone here get upset about the idea of MicroSoft Word spitting out unique "serial numbers" in your Word documents?
If it is evil for Intel and Microsoft, why is it okay for id?
I don't give a damn who's taking what data from my computer without my knowledge.
And yes, it should be item #1 on the license agreement, in big-ass bold letters on the FIRST PAGE on the screen that you are FORCED to read.
You need s search warrant to search my house. Why is it different to search my computer?
What's next, play a game and have to pee into a cup?
The reason people are mourning her and not some unknown mother of three in a car wreck is that they don't even know the mother of three exists.
There are six billion (6,000,000,000 to make sure that we Yanks and the Brits are thinking of the same "billion") people out there in the world. People are dying all the time. In the time it will take me to fisnish this sentence at least one person (at my typing speed it will be far greater than that) will have died somewhere in the world for some reason.
Do I mourn the person(s) who died while I was foolishly puttering away my limited time on this world typing this? Probably not.
Why? I DON'T KNOW THEM! I have never met them, I don't know their names, I've never seen their faces, they have never directly impacted my life in such a way that I can associate the effect with the person as an individual.
The death of a famous person is a lot different. I don't really know them, but I know of them. I've seen their faces, or heard their voices, or music, read their words, seen their films, etc... They have efeected my life in a way _I_ can accociate the effect with the pserson.
THAT is why famous people are mourned by the masses of the population. It is BECAUSE we know of them, we know they exist.
In the end >99% of us will only be mourned by the family and friends we leave behind. Is that really so bad?
I think the point was was not "let's not find out what happened and learn from it", I think the point was against groups spouting off crap like "See! Working for those sinners will make you kill yourself! It is the End Times!".
The people who make the latter pronouncements will forget her work in non-SouthPark projects and focus only on the fact that she worked for a group making television they hate. Will they consider that it was probably something in her private life? Will they treat her death with the respect that the passing of any human life deserves?
_THAT_ is the fear that others are expressing (if I understand their posts). Not that we should not examine why this happened and learn from it, but that it will be exploited by those with an axe to grind against SouthPark, by those of such low moral character that they would use any tragidy to further their agenda.
And when toy start your own company and some giant corporation comes along and starts a competing company with almost identicle (sp?) names and logos, you'd sue them to protect your business, wouldn't you?
Or would you just roll over and let them bury you?
data protection at a company I worked for was wondering why I was getting E-Mail from lesbianlove@sexbot.com' or something.
A while back my boss started recieving all kinds of porno spam on our corporate email account, lots of it, including HTML with pictures. Understand that my boss is an older gentleman who came out of retirement because being retired bored him. He was quite shocked.
We spent several days hunting down any email address we could find for these assholes and sending them a threatening sounding letter our company lawyer had crafted for us.
Most of it eventuallt stopped. I don't know if it was the letters or the fact that no one using our email address had bought any of their "products".
In regards to the anti-squatting bill (man, everybody hates campers), whereas I agree with it in general, I'm offended that it was tacked onto the ass end of a completely unrelated bill.
Riders should be outlawed, pure and simple. More "evil" legislation has been tacked onto the end of popular bills that we now have a huge number of laws that never would have gone into effect if they had been on their own.
Let us not forget that the case against GM was dealt a severe blow when it was discovered that model rocket engines were planted on the trucks to get the tanks to explode on que for the cameras.
It sounds to me that the Wachowsky brothers did "The Matrix" just for the Sequels. This is true with Star Wars. I mean the movie started out as "Episode IV". Now that takes guts.
Not quite. When Star Wars was released in 1977 it did not have the "episode 4" label stuck to it. That did not come about until The Empire Strikes Back.
One of my co-workers is a devout church-going woman with two teenaged sons. She is concerned with the availabilty of material she finds unacceptable on the Internet.
She was recently asking me about measures to restrict _her_ kids using _her_ computer. I suggested various ideas from putting passwords on her dailup access, on her ssytem BIOS, installing a "Net-Nanny" type program and maybe even getting an external modem and taking it to work with her in her purse.
What's the point of this? The point is that she is concerend about what she can do to protect _HER_ kids. She is not interested in protecting other people's kids, or restricting what _I_ can look at. Just what _her_ kids look at.
It is the responcibility of the _PARENT_ (let me repeat that slowly, "the responcibility of the _PARENT_") not of the State to safeguard children from things their _PARENTS_ may not want them to see.
I _REFUSE_ to give up my right to look and Jenny McCarthy's naked @ss just because someone else does not want their kids to see it.
You don't want your kids to see prOn? Don't let them use the 'net without supervision. Can't be bothered to supervise your kids? Get off your fat ass and take some responcibilty for your kids, damnit!
I can only hope that Gateway is next, regardless of their ownership of the Amiga name (the Amiga is never coming back, get over it).
Anyone remember that Packard Bell knockoff called the Pack-n-Tell? I never played with one of those, but anyone who feels the need to rip off the name of a third-stringer probably produces absolute crap!
And speaking of Tandy, as someone above was, Tandy is one of the _FEW_ computer companies to lisence IBM's MCA bus, and the _ONLY_ company I know of to produce a PC built on the 80186 processor.
As anyone who has read my previous posts knows, I'm not a huge fan of Unix in general (on a personal level, my employers mission ctitical system is a Unix box) butI only have one thing to say about MicroSofts' new pricing stratagy:
What parting gifts do we have for our contestant today?
id Software bought the _RIGHTS_ to the name and basic premise to "Castle Wolfenstein", an old Apple II game that John Carmack and John Romero both loved.
The game "Wolfenstein 3D" was developed by id. John Carmack wrote the engine, Adrian (sp?) Carmack (no relation) and Kevin Cloud did the artwork.
You can find a LOT of _researched_ information about Wolf3D in Stan Staziak's (now maintained by someone who's name escapes me) Wolfenstein 3D FAQ. (anyone got an URL handy?)
No, you DON'T need any damned $5,000.00 OpenGL developement kit! What you DO need is a Voodoo or Voodoo2 card, as that is the only OpenGL hardware supported by BeOS at this moment. I've run it in software mode (my Voodoo 2 is in the other computer) and it works fine.
Maybe I'm just a cynic, but am I the only one who sees this as just an attempt to get some "cool" technology for Linux without having to spend the time to create it from scratch?
Wkat Linux needs is API and UI standards, not yet ANOTHER cast-off technology rolled into it.
Slashdot Mirror
Today it's only my video card information? What will it be tomorrow?
Didn;t everyone here get all pissed off about Intel putting retrievable (sp?) serial numbers on their chips? Didn;t everyone here get upset about the idea of MicroSoft Word spitting out unique "serial numbers" in your Word documents?
If it is evil for Intel and Microsoft, why is it okay for id?
I don't give a damn who's taking what data from my computer without my knowledge.
And yes, it should be item #1 on the license agreement, in big-ass bold letters on the FIRST PAGE on the screen that you are FORCED to read.
You need s search warrant to search my house. Why is it different to search my computer?
What's next, play a game and have to pee into a cup?
California, my ass! What about Alaska and Hawaii? We're tired of beeing second class Americans!
Be warned, Continental United States snobs, you'll be first against the wall when the revolution comes!
(now where's that bottle of S'More Schnapps I was "sampling"?)
So "neener-neener-neener!".
I'm sorry, that was cruel. I'm such a bastard.
The reason people are mourning her and not some unknown mother of three in a car wreck is that they don't even know the mother of three exists.
There are six billion (6,000,000,000 to make sure that we Yanks and the Brits are thinking of the same "billion") people out there in the world. People are dying all the time. In the time it will take me to fisnish this sentence at least one person (at my typing speed it will be far greater than that) will have died somewhere in the world for some reason.
Do I mourn the person(s) who died while I was foolishly puttering away my limited time on this world typing this? Probably not.
Why? I DON'T KNOW THEM! I have never met them, I don't know their names, I've never seen their faces, they have never directly impacted my life in such a way that I can associate the effect with the person as an individual.
The death of a famous person is a lot different. I don't really know them, but I know of them. I've seen their faces, or heard their voices, or music, read their words, seen their films, etc... They have efeected my life in a way _I_ can accociate the effect with the pserson.
THAT is why famous people are mourned by the masses of the population. It is BECAUSE we know of them, we know they exist.
In the end >99% of us will only be mourned by the family and friends we leave behind. Is that really so bad?
I think the point was was not "let's not find out what happened and learn from it", I think the point was against groups spouting off crap like "See! Working for those sinners will make you kill yourself! It is the End Times!".
The people who make the latter pronouncements will forget her work in non-SouthPark projects and focus only on the fact that she worked for a group making television they hate. Will they consider that it was probably something in her private life? Will they treat her death with the respect that the passing of any human life deserves?
_THAT_ is the fear that others are expressing (if I understand their posts). Not that we should not examine why this happened and learn from it, but that it will be exploited by those with an axe to grind against SouthPark, by those of such low moral character that they would use any tragidy to further their agenda.
At least, that's my position.
And when toy start your own company and some giant corporation comes along and starts a competing company with almost identicle (sp?) names and logos, you'd sue them to protect your business, wouldn't you?
Or would you just roll over and let them bury you?
Well, if I started a comapany called "Lucian" with a logo that looked almost the same as the Lucent logo I'd expect to get sued.
I mean, not only does the (defunct) go.com logo look almost the same as goto.com, the name is almost the same.
Did they really expect to not get sued?
That one is easy. Stick to STANDARIZED HTML. I don't use ANY IE or Netscape extensions, it's just not worth it.
It's the lieing and manupulative tacticts that these groups (NAMBLA and the DMA and their ilk) use that reallly piss me off.
Well, I'm sure that's gonna start an argument. Sorry.
A while back my boss started recieving all kinds of porno spam on our corporate email account, lots of it, including HTML with pictures. Understand that my boss is an older gentleman who came out of retirement because being retired bored him. He was quite shocked.
We spent several days hunting down any email address we could find for these assholes and sending them a threatening sounding letter our company lawyer had crafted for us.
Most of it eventuallt stopped. I don't know if it was the letters or the fact that no one using our email address had bought any of their "products".
Actually, looking at Tandy's track record this makes a lot of sense.
Consdider:
1: The last year the Tandy Model 4D (64k CP\M) was still for sale it was priced at $4,000.00, right next to the 80286/12 which cost less
2: Tandy was the only company I know of that marketed a PC using the 80186 processor
3: Tandy was one of the very few that bought into IBM's MCA bus
And now this. Man, they need to back to basics and just sell leather goods.
It's not a security issu ewith the OS, it's the way that MicroSoft has tied its email programs so tightly to the OS.
I use Windows 98(lite) and Netscape. Am I at risk? Yes, but NEARLY as high as if I was using IE or Outlook.
In regards to the anti-squatting bill (man, everybody hates campers), whereas I agree with it in general, I'm offended that it was tacked onto the ass end of a completely unrelated bill.
Riders should be outlawed, pure and simple. More "evil" legislation has been tacked onto the end of popular bills that we now have a huge number of laws that never would have gone into effect if they had been on their own.
Okay, I'm done ranting now.
I'd post under an AC if I posted something like that.
It's too bad that both Internet Exploder and Netscape 4.x suck so bad.
The government almost lost the case on that day.
Picture the following scene, if you will:
[Neo and Morphius] - whisper, whisper.
[Neo] - (click) "B-7"
[Agent Smith] - (rustling, click!) "You sank...my Squidly...Mr...Anderson"
[Neo] - (high-fives Morphius) "Dude!"
[Morphius] - "Right on!"
[Agent Smith] - "Best three...out of...five...Mr Anderson?"
Or maybe this:
Neo and Morphius land in Hell -
[Neo] - (looks around) "Dude, our O'Reilly books covers lied to us!"
Well, back to work....
Stop stealing my lines!
Not quite. When Star Wars was released in 1977 it did not have the "episode 4" label stuck to it. That did not come about until The Empire Strikes Back.
One of my co-workers is a devout church-going woman with two teenaged sons. She is concerned with the availabilty of material she finds unacceptable on the Internet.
She was recently asking me about measures to restrict _her_ kids using _her_ computer. I suggested various ideas from putting passwords on her dailup access, on her ssytem BIOS, installing a "Net-Nanny" type program and maybe even getting an external modem and taking it to work with her in her purse.
What's the point of this? The point is that she is concerend about what she can do to protect _HER_ kids. She is not interested in protecting other people's kids, or restricting what _I_ can look at. Just what _her_ kids look at.
It is the responcibility of the _PARENT_ (let me repeat that slowly, "the responcibility of the _PARENT_") not of the State to safeguard children from things their _PARENTS_ may not want them to see.
I _REFUSE_ to give up my right to look and Jenny McCarthy's naked @ss just because someone else does not want their kids to see it.
You don't want your kids to see prOn? Don't let them use the 'net without supervision. Can't be bothered to supervise your kids? Get off your fat ass and take some responcibilty for your kids, damnit!
Well, goodbye Packard Bell. Good riddance.
I can only hope that Gateway is next, regardless of their ownership of the Amiga name (the Amiga is never coming back, get over it).
Anyone remember that Packard Bell knockoff called the Pack-n-Tell? I never played with one of those, but anyone who feels the need to rip off the name of a third-stringer probably produces absolute crap!
And speaking of Tandy, as someone above was, Tandy is one of the _FEW_ computer companies to lisence IBM's MCA bus, and the _ONLY_ company I know of to produce a PC built on the 80186 processor.
As anyone who has read my previous posts knows, I'm not a huge fan of Unix in general (on a personal level, my employers mission ctitical system is a Unix box) butI only have one thing to say about MicroSofts' new pricing stratagy:
Linux will rule the e-commerce world.
What parting gifts do we have for our contestant today?
id Software bought the _RIGHTS_ to the name and basic premise to "Castle Wolfenstein", an old Apple II game that John Carmack and John Romero both loved.
The game "Wolfenstein 3D" was developed by id. John Carmack wrote the engine, Adrian (sp?) Carmack (no relation) and Kevin Cloud did the artwork.
You can find a LOT of _researched_ information about Wolf3D in Stan Staziak's (now maintained by someone who's name escapes me) Wolfenstein 3D FAQ.
(anyone got an URL handy?)
No, you DON'T need any damned $5,000.00 OpenGL developement kit! What you DO need is a Voodoo or Voodoo2 card, as that is the only OpenGL hardware supported by BeOS at this moment. I've run it in software mode (my Voodoo 2 is in the other computer) and it works fine.
How about a little research next time?
Maybe I'm just a cynic, but am I the only one who sees this as just an attempt to get some "cool" technology for Linux without having to spend the time to create it from scratch?
Wkat Linux needs is API and UI standards, not yet ANOTHER cast-off technology rolled into it.