Obviously, you need more priorities. Nobody wants to mark his pet project as "low" priority, so you need to be creative. Ask marketing for help, and you'll end up with your new priorities: "High", "Very High", "Red", "Extreme", "Platinum", "Overclocked", "Done Yesterday", "Drop Everything", and "The Boss Is Watching".
You must be a mouse user. Mouse users love having windows plastered all over the desktop because they need to be able to click on each one to get to it. I'm a keyboard user, I almost never touch the mouse. To me there is no benefit in having multiple windows on the screen; the clutter is distracting. Yes, I run many windows at the same time, but I still work in only one at a time. At most, I use two windows side by side - one to type into, the other to look at. It's a completely different style of working; perhaps you would like to try it sometime.
No logician anywhere has ever posited such a "first law"
All logicians have posited this law, but perhaps you did not recognize my description of it. The first law of logic is commonly known as the law of identity, and is often stated as "A is A", or "everything is something". The purpose of the law of identity is to disallow use of vague words that refer to nothing. In every argument you must be able to point to every word in each of your sentences and define precisely and unambiguously what it refers to. In other words, you must make sure that everything you say refers to something real. Or, that all the concepts in your logic are "something", and something specific. Or, generally, that everybody knows what you are talking about.
Of course, no one talks about "logic" any more. We are all Bayesians now
Bayesian logic also requires the law of identity, since the "Bayesian" part merely refers to the method and the meaning of referring to values between the absolute "true" and "false". You still have to have a valid statement to evaluate in a Bayesian manner, and a statement is only valid if every part of it is valid. Each part is valid only if it is a "something"; or a concept referring to an object or property of an object in reality.
The first law of logic is that you must know what you're talking about. Without an agreed upon definition, any use of the word "life" invalidates logical arguments containing it.
Any discussion about patents must start by stating the fact that most patent infringements occur when its idea is reinvented, not stolen. So when you say that patents benefit the inventor, you must clarify that each patent only benefits one inventor, who was the first to register a particular idea. Thus we can rephrase the patent argument as: should people be rewarded for being the first to think of something?
Perhaps you should also wonder why anybody would want to fit into the corporate culture. When a man takes a corporate job, it's solely because he needs the money; if he had a choice, he would no doubt go elsewhere. Congratulations to all those big companies, who have succeeded in creating an environment nobody wants, where people nobody likes design products nobody buys.
You can read the actual complaint in the second link. It is not about any copyright violations of busybox code. He's whining about the fact that with a non-GPL busybox replacement he won't have an excuse to sue for Linux kernel GPL violations. Kernel developers are generally not inclined to sue anybody for not releasing the source code to kernel modifications, while busybox developers sue everybody in sight. If busybox is replaced, it would be more likely that device manufacturers who do not release sources for kernel modifications would be able to get away with it.
And to think that only 30 years ago a resourceful fellow could fix a circuit board with a silver dollar, pliers, and a car battery. With today's electronics, MacGyver would be dead.
Apple's philosophy resulted in their products being used by millions. Google's philosophy has produced search, gmail, and pretty much nothing else that anybody uses. The results speak for themselves.
I used to be like you. You have much to learn, I'm afraid.
So do you. One of the things you'll learn is that having 548 facebook friends is not a significant lifetime achievement.
I'd hardly call games "intellectually challenging" for the most part. Maybe adventure games or something where you have to solve inane, nonsensical puzzles.
I'd hardly call a social life "intellectually challenging" for the most part. All you do is answer inane nonsensical questions and gossip about other people. Few activities are more worthless than this.
That depends on your values. If you believe that maintaining relationships with other people is the most important thing in life, then of course you would feel this way about games. On the other hand, some of us believe that hanging out with people is a complete waste of time, and would rather spend time on something more intellectually challenging than pointless smalltalk. This way I get to spend time on things I enjoy, and you can go talk about that football game again or spend six hours debating pros and cons of beer vs wine.
You collect data in order to determine the general trend. Nobody expects it to predict each and every thing you do exactly. Hence, even though you bucked the trend and learned something on your own, the data collector is still justified in making the prediction that you can only know what you were formally taught because in 99% of the cases this will be true. If you learn on your own, think for yourself, or otherwise do something you're not supposed to be doing, you're the exception and the companies who buy data to predict your behaviour don't care about you anyway because you're not the sucker they're looking for.
We already know how much warming it can cause because it had already happened before. 250My ago, before all that carbon became fossil fuels, global temperatures were 4-6C higher than today. At least, wikipedia says so. On the other hand, 300My ago temperatures were 2C lower than today, even though there were no fossil fuels yet, so you can't blame CO2 for all of it. One look at that graph makes it pretty obvious where the climate change limits might be, and they are not nearly as catastrophic as the global warming doomsayers scream about.
There is/proc/pid/mem, a pseudofile referring to the memory of process pid. It has 0600 permissions so you can't write to the memory of other users' processes. The bug occurs when you exec an suid executable and the kernel does not change open fds for/proc/pid/mem. This way, you can open mem, dup it to stderr, and exec su with a garbage parameter. su will duly print an error, quoting the offending parameter, writing to its process memory. With a properly selected shellcode you can get root.
Slashdot Mirror
Obviously, you need more priorities. Nobody wants to mark his pet project as "low" priority, so you need to be creative. Ask marketing for help, and you'll end up with your new priorities: "High", "Very High", "Red", "Extreme", "Platinum", "Overclocked", "Done Yesterday", "Drop Everything", and "The Boss Is Watching".
Blasphemy! Everybody knows that any game looks best at 320x240. 320x240 on a 26" monitor FTW!
You must be a mouse user. Mouse users love having windows plastered all over the desktop because they need to be able to click on each one to get to it. I'm a keyboard user, I almost never touch the mouse. To me there is no benefit in having multiple windows on the screen; the clutter is distracting. Yes, I run many windows at the same time, but I still work in only one at a time. At most, I use two windows side by side - one to type into, the other to look at. It's a completely different style of working; perhaps you would like to try it sometime.
All logicians have posited this law, but perhaps you did not recognize my description of it. The first law of logic is commonly known as the law of identity, and is often stated as "A is A", or "everything is something". The purpose of the law of identity is to disallow use of vague words that refer to nothing. In every argument you must be able to point to every word in each of your sentences and define precisely and unambiguously what it refers to. In other words, you must make sure that everything you say refers to something real. Or, that all the concepts in your logic are "something", and something specific. Or, generally, that everybody knows what you are talking about.
Bayesian logic also requires the law of identity, since the "Bayesian" part merely refers to the method and the meaning of referring to values between the absolute "true" and "false". You still have to have a valid statement to evaluate in a Bayesian manner, and a statement is only valid if every part of it is valid. Each part is valid only if it is a "something"; or a concept referring to an object or property of an object in reality.
The first law of logic is that you must know what you're talking about. Without an agreed upon definition, any use of the word "life" invalidates logical arguments containing it.
Any discussion about patents must start by stating the fact that most patent infringements occur when its idea is reinvented, not stolen. So when you say that patents benefit the inventor, you must clarify that each patent only benefits one inventor, who was the first to register a particular idea. Thus we can rephrase the patent argument as: should people be rewarded for being the first to think of something?
If you're not on facebook and have friends, how do you friend them?
In related news from last year, global sea levels dropped 6mm over 2010.
No matter how much you add to your height, you'll still be a nerd, which is a far more significant handicap in the dating world.
Perhaps you should also wonder why anybody would want to fit into the corporate culture. When a man takes a corporate job, it's solely because he needs the money; if he had a choice, he would no doubt go elsewhere. Congratulations to all those big companies, who have succeeded in creating an environment nobody wants, where people nobody likes design products nobody buys.
I just don't understand why they make them so thin. Thin brittle things tend to snap in half like crackers.
You can read the actual complaint in the second link. It is not about any copyright violations of busybox code. He's whining about the fact that with a non-GPL busybox replacement he won't have an excuse to sue for Linux kernel GPL violations. Kernel developers are generally not inclined to sue anybody for not releasing the source code to kernel modifications, while busybox developers sue everybody in sight. If busybox is replaced, it would be more likely that device manufacturers who do not release sources for kernel modifications would be able to get away with it.
That's way too slow to keep up with firefox. ESRs should have been 4,8,16,32,...
It's worth that much because it's the world's most effective interface to the world's most gullible idiots and their money.
Speaking of which, have you SEEN today's software? Hordes of programmers work on it around the clock and still can't fix it.
They just want you to upgrade to a newer, larger version, with more features.
And to think that only 30 years ago a resourceful fellow could fix a circuit board with a silver dollar, pliers, and a car battery. With today's electronics, MacGyver would be dead.
You have to be a mad scientist to do that
Apple's philosophy resulted in their products being used by millions. Google's philosophy has produced search, gmail, and pretty much nothing else that anybody uses. The results speak for themselves.
So do you. One of the things you'll learn is that having 548 facebook friends is not a significant lifetime achievement.
I'd hardly call a social life "intellectually challenging" for the most part. All you do is answer inane nonsensical questions and gossip about other people. Few activities are more worthless than this.
That depends on your values. If you believe that maintaining relationships with other people is the most important thing in life, then of course you would feel this way about games. On the other hand, some of us believe that hanging out with people is a complete waste of time, and would rather spend time on something more intellectually challenging than pointless smalltalk. This way I get to spend time on things I enjoy, and you can go talk about that football game again or spend six hours debating pros and cons of beer vs wine.
You collect data in order to determine the general trend. Nobody expects it to predict each and every thing you do exactly. Hence, even though you bucked the trend and learned something on your own, the data collector is still justified in making the prediction that you can only know what you were formally taught because in 99% of the cases this will be true. If you learn on your own, think for yourself, or otherwise do something you're not supposed to be doing, you're the exception and the companies who buy data to predict your behaviour don't care about you anyway because you're not the sucker they're looking for.
We already know how much warming it can cause because it had already happened before. 250My ago, before all that carbon became fossil fuels, global temperatures were 4-6C higher than today. At least, wikipedia says so. On the other hand, 300My ago temperatures were 2C lower than today, even though there were no fossil fuels yet, so you can't blame CO2 for all of it. One look at that graph makes it pretty obvious where the climate change limits might be, and they are not nearly as catastrophic as the global warming doomsayers scream about.
There is /proc/pid/mem, a pseudofile referring to the memory of process pid. It has 0600 permissions so you can't write to the memory of other users' processes. The bug occurs when you exec an suid executable and the kernel does not change open fds for /proc/pid/mem. This way, you can open mem, dup it to stderr, and exec su with a garbage parameter. su will duly print an error, quoting the offending parameter, writing to its process memory. With a properly selected shellcode you can get root.
I prefer folding cars the old fashioned way.