I've read all the comments, and only 2 so far said they didnt eat, without mentioning drinking something or some other ritual.
I would hereby like to specifically mention: I wake up, I go to work. I don't eat. I don't drink coffee. I don't drink orange juice. I don't drink... I don't chug 2 liters of water. (wtf?) I don't get a blowjob. I don't I don't take a bunch of [xxinsertstimulantherexx].
The exact reason why I've no bought it: I need to pay for the box,/and/ it's useless unless I pay a monthly fee. That math doesnt fly, even with a "free trial" month.
It's not the concept of weapons of mass destruction that's a problem. Were there some sort of perfect weapon of mass destruction which did not destroy things on a massive scale, but instead only turned the bad guys into unicorns, it would be perfectly agreeable.
Did you seriously just say "Imagine if you were calling someone in California and your rate varied depending on what network the other person had"?
Show of hands.. anyone need to "imagine" that? That's how it works over here, in the USA. Calls in-network are free, calls out-of-network are charged differently. Not every provider does that, but they are certainly free to do so. Different people offering different choices is what makes it "competition".
[I am FOR net neutrality, but your phone example sucks;)]
"The Concept of Social Welfare" != "The line item in the budget called Welfare" See it's got that word "Social" in front of it that lets you know he's talking about something different.
So the problem you have is: Not only are they going to be giving out new education and communication opportunities, but by the very nature of how they are doing it, they will be creating new economic opportunities.
I personally don't see any problem with that.
But I see the addition of choice ("Well, I could buy a new system so that I can play games, or I could buy some medicine" vs "I have money! Now I can finally buy medicine!") as a good thing. Idiots will remain idiots, and if someone dies because of a bad choice, remember it's really the bad/decision/, not the choice itself.
What we should be doing is beaming radio signals at distant protoplanets, hoping that by the time the signals get their, intelligent life has formed. Those life forms, inspired by our signals, could then devise a way to travel faster than the speed of light and get here at the exact moment we sent the signals in the first place. Instant gratification!
What most P*shop users have trouble with when first starting the Gimp is usually described as the MDI vs SDI debate, which is really just a difference which people are used to, not "one way is better than the other*"
*One way is clearly better than the other, and the other way is dead wrong. But as/both/ ways have limitations, you might as well complain about Paint Shop too, if you're not already used to it.
See how much restraint I have to not argue for one side or the other? Watch this get modded flamebait anyway.
good design and documentation.. or code for that matter. How do you intend on building a replacement for a system that: 1) Is ancient and pretty hard to understand to begin with 2) Has no source code 3) Can never, EVER be turned off 4) You don't specifically know the function of ?
You can either keep using what it was originally built with (okay, not "no" source code, but very little remains) Or you can add "and is written in very dissimilar and unrelated languages"
Often the best way to "just start using" a better language is to "just start using" a completely separate system, and a propagation tool. -> which of course leads to "Oracle is slower than our VSAM files! We can't use this!"
I caught the tail end of a talk someone was giving about modern COBOL and how mainframes were becoming more and more relevant (delivered by a hip 19 year old to a room full of 50 year olds) I don't remember specifically what innovation was being talked about, but I think it was along the sophistications of a foreach loop It was sad.
You're comparing a budget plan based on Jesus coming back within the next 2 years with one for curing diseases which Jesus would be able to cure (that is, based on Jesus not coming back within the next 2 years).
"Let's use a standard that would limit us to only basic document processing because it works well for basic document processing"
To handle complex documents and complex non-static layous, CSS would need to be "embraced and extended" so much we'd never have anything resembling a standard again.
Is that even the case? Don't most emails take their timestamp from the sender's client? Unfortunately, no. Outlook and Thunderbird both often sort by whatever the server claims the original sending time was, as evidenced by the ocassional "ancient mail" or "forever mail" you might see.
[though these bugs may have been fixed by now.. since they're so stupid]
The phone lines in our office use RJ45 connectors. I expect they are intended to be used with the type of fancy phone system one would expect in a building with four whole rooms (2 of which actually seem intended to be used as offices)
After the person who hooked up our phone lines informed us that there was no way to use an old phone with these connectors, no converter, no nothing, we would need to buy new phones (which Bell South had a fine selection of, of course), and then each of the offices would need to be wired professionally (which Bell South could do!)... I found that we still had: 1) A crimping tool 2) Leftover CAT5 cable 3) more splitters than could possibly be justified by a single DSL line.
I know nothing about phones, or electrical anything beyond my kindergarden science fair project on Conductivity (pennies DO conduct, oatmeal lids DON'T!). This is a piss-poor job.
Every phone in our office plugs into a splitter. An RJ11 crimped onto a CAT5 cable (two dangling wires) plugs into the same [read:wrong] end of the same splitter, which then plugs into the wall's RJ45 connector.
At the other end is a nest of wires in which many small wires pulled out of a CAT5 cable connect every line of the terminal to the same connection on the terminal as the only "real" phone line in the building (which is located in the 4'^2 "lobby")
I'm pretty certain the terminal is not intended to have four wires stacked onto the same connection. But as I said, I'm not an electrical anything. For all I know, this is how it was meant to be done. All I know is: It works.
Slashdot Mirror
next week we'll be reading a story about how the story about how the other story was crap was crap :)
It comes in tubes.
Exact same story here. Though I tended to e-mail word and plain text formats while providing a link to 4 other formats.
I've read all the comments, and only 2 so far said they didnt eat, without mentioning drinking something or some other ritual.
I would hereby like to specifically mention:
I wake up, I go to work.
I don't eat.
I don't drink coffee.
I don't drink orange juice.
I don't drink...
I don't chug 2 liters of water. (wtf?)
I don't get a blowjob.
I don't I don't take a bunch of [xxinsertstimulantherexx].
What the fuck is wrong with you people?
The exact reason why I've no bought it: I need to pay for the box, /and/ it's useless unless I pay a monthly fee. That math doesnt fly, even with a "free trial" month.
same goes with starting any business that deals with products covered by IP law. YANAL, and most people in any sort of business will admit that.
It's not the concept of weapons of mass destruction that's a problem. Were there some sort of perfect weapon of mass destruction which did not destroy things on a massive scale, but instead only turned the bad guys into unicorns, it would be perfectly agreeable.
They remember all the good things government does, when ninjas in business suits [flying airplanes] bomb the hell out of sealand.
Free porn.. getting tougher to find..?!
On what time scale??
stay out of my ditch!
Did you seriously just say "Imagine if you were calling someone in California and your rate varied depending on what network the other person had"?
;)]
Show of hands.. anyone need to "imagine" that? That's how it works over here, in the USA. Calls in-network are free, calls out-of-network are charged differently.
Not every provider does that, but they are certainly free to do so. Different people offering different choices is what makes it "competition".
[I am FOR net neutrality, but your phone example sucks
"The Concept of Social Welfare" != "The line item in the budget called Welfare"
See it's got that word "Social" in front of it that lets you know he's talking about something different.
So the problem you have is: Not only are they going to be giving out new education and communication opportunities, but by the very nature of how they are doing it, they will be creating new economic opportunities.
/decision/, not the choice itself.
I personally don't see any problem with that.
But I see the addition of choice ("Well, I could buy a new system so that I can play games, or I could buy some medicine" vs "I have money! Now I can finally buy medicine!") as a good thing. Idiots will remain idiots, and if someone dies because of a bad choice, remember it's really the bad
What we should be doing is beaming radio signals at distant protoplanets, hoping that by the time the signals get their, intelligent life has formed. Those life forms, inspired by our signals, could then devise a way to travel faster than the speed of light and get here at the exact moment we sent the signals in the first place.
Instant gratification!
What most P*shop users have trouble with when first starting the Gimp is usually described as the MDI vs SDI debate, which is really just a difference which people are used to, not "one way is better than the other*"
/both/ ways have limitations, you might as well complain about Paint Shop too, if you're not already used to it.
*One way is clearly better than the other, and the other way is dead wrong. But as
See how much restraint I have to not argue for one side or the other? Watch this get modded flamebait anyway.
good design and documentation.. or code for that matter.
How do you intend on building a replacement for a system that:
1) Is ancient and pretty hard to understand to begin with
2) Has no source code
3) Can never, EVER be turned off
4) You don't specifically know the function of
?
You can either keep using what it was originally built with (okay, not "no" source code, but very little remains)
Or you can add "and is written in very dissimilar and unrelated languages"
Often the best way to "just start using" a better language is to "just start using" a completely separate system, and a propagation tool.
-> which of course leads to "Oracle is slower than our VSAM files! We can't use this!"
I caught the tail end of a talk someone was giving about modern COBOL and how mainframes were becoming more and more relevant (delivered by a hip 19 year old to a room full of 50 year olds) I don't remember specifically what innovation was being talked about, but I think it was along the sophistications of a foreach loop
It was sad.
Nobody has mentioned PAX or Penny Arcade yet?
You're comparing a budget plan based on Jesus coming back within the next 2 years with one for curing diseases which Jesus would be able to cure (that is, based on Jesus not coming back within the next 2 years).
Your comparison is obviously invalid.
In a race to see who can move all the water from one basin to another...
"I carry a 1 gallon bucket and run around in circles 5,000,000 times a second. I'm faster!"
"I carry two 1 gallon buckets and run around in circles 2,500,000 times a second. I'm faster!"
It would prove once and for all that a Yeti did exist at one point, may he rest in peace.
Because that's not a complicated problem that entire industries are built around or anything.
"Let's use a standard that would limit us to only basic document processing because it works well for basic document processing"
To handle complex documents and complex non-static layous, CSS would need to be "embraced and extended" so much we'd never have anything resembling a standard again.
[though these bugs may have been fixed by now.. since they're so stupid]
The phone lines in our office use RJ45 connectors. I expect they are intended to be used with the type of fancy phone system one would expect in a building with four whole rooms (2 of which actually seem intended to be used as offices)
After the person who hooked up our phone lines informed us that there was no way to use an old phone with these connectors, no converter, no nothing, we would need to buy new phones (which Bell South had a fine selection of, of course), and then each of the offices would need to be wired professionally (which Bell South could do!)...
I found that we still had: 1) A crimping tool 2) Leftover CAT5 cable 3) more splitters than could possibly be justified by a single DSL line.
I know nothing about phones, or electrical anything beyond my kindergarden science fair project on Conductivity (pennies DO conduct, oatmeal lids DON'T!). This is a piss-poor job.
Every phone in our office plugs into a splitter. An RJ11 crimped onto a CAT5 cable (two dangling wires) plugs into the same [read:wrong] end of the same splitter, which then plugs into the wall's RJ45 connector.
At the other end is a nest of wires in which many small wires pulled out of a CAT5 cable connect every line of the terminal to the same connection on the terminal as the only "real" phone line in the building (which is located in the 4'^2 "lobby")
I'm pretty certain the terminal is not intended to have four wires stacked onto the same connection. But as I said, I'm not an electrical anything. For all I know, this is how it was meant to be done. All I know is: It works.
"Absolute" isnt a very good assumption when lacking a scale. As for what scale:
"First one, then the other."