Yes, well the point is to ban magazines with capacities "higher than we want you to have" (aka, anything greater than zero) and not "higher than would normally be used with a weapon of this type".
Separately, and not in relation to the parent post, but since I'm posting right now... the AC are out in force today!
In response to the "what for?" in the "Uncle hacked hypothesis" a reasonable scenario exists where this would be of benefit to the malware authors. Specifically, having malware alone on a computer doesn't necessarily generate revenue for them, for that they need to use it to obtain something with a more liquid monetary value - such as user/pass credentials for the users bank, etc. In fact, the ideal scenario from a malware author's point of view is that he wants to 1. Infect a computer, 2. Use the infection for gain, and 3. Spread the infection so that #2 can be repeated elsewhere.
I have to agree with Frosty here. The page that is linked in the summary clearly identifies the problem in the section entitled Rationale; "The decline in new contributor growth is the single most serious challenge facing the Wikimedia movement in the year 2011." Unfortunately they come to the wrong conclusion as to how to address the issue with the very next sentence; "Removing the avoidable technical impediments associated with Wikimedia's editing interface is a necessary pre-condition for increasing the number of Wikimedia contributors."
Quite frankly, it's obvious that the "technical impediments" of the editing interface are not to blame or else there would not currently be 4,099,684 pages of content (which excludes an additional 24,635,011 "other" pages - source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Statistics ) as I type this. No, as Frosty P. states the problem is with the drama that comes with attempting to edit or create articles on Wikipedia. Rampant deletionism (which wasn't a thing before Wikipedia, hah!) abounds and new users are driven away in frustration. In short, they need to work on getting their current volunteers to operate in a more welcoming manner.
No doubt a majority of the problem is caused by a minority of the editors, but like everything else the vocal minority will out-influence a silent majority. This is the problem.
There's been a lot of back and forth revision of the definition over the years. I remember it was originally something like "Any object used outside of its natural scope to achieve a goal." Then people realized this meant otters used stones as tools to open clams so it became "Any object that has been modified to increase efficiency for a purpose outside of its natural scope." Then we had video of apes stripping leaves from branches to stick them in anthills... and the revision continues on ad infinitum because heaven forbid that humans have to share the title of "Tool-maker/user" with lesser beings.
When installers ask me if I want a short-cut to their wiz-bang application I cringe.
I cringe more when they don't ask and just do it anyway. Serious pet-peeve.
It seems that everything on Android does this. The first thing I do after installing something is to remove the shortcut from the main pages. I have a whole screen with nothing but my apps - why would I want that on my main screen too?
As an aside, Code Monkey's is currently on Netflix instant streaming. I've been watching it since my path was the opposite (knew the song, never saw the show).
I don't know if you have an Android but whenever I download apps there's always a list of permissions it will have. That alone probably constitutes a degree of permission by the user, I'm sure.
I've a friend that's flip-flopped from telling me I needed an iPhone (when I got a Galaxy SII) to telling me how wonderful his wife's Galaxy SIII is. He's not even a tech-type guy and he's talked about the Apple vs. Samsung trial specifically because he wants to get a Galaxy SIII for himself soon.
Customers are fickle (outside of the the fanboy spectrum) and will jump on whatever is "hot" at the time. That's the whole purpose of the "walled garden" that Apple - and yes, Google "Play Store" also - encourages. It's an attempt to lock people into a specific set of devices (ones that you profit from) by discouraging change. Who wants to lose music, games, etc just because there's a new device out that is a little better? The better they can convince people to stay, the more money they can extract.
So yes, outside of the walling of the gardens, I suspect people want those choices. I would find it really interesting to see people genuinely upset that they're getting taken away from them.
USB webcam is a great and inexpensive way to go. My dad did this very thing one time - leave it on and set to record when it senses motion.
A windy day left him with a bit of extra footage when the bushes would shake, but he also got every single car and person that drove/walked by on the sidewalk.
As a Kentuckian I'm extremely disappointed that the sponsor would even think something of this nature is a good idea. As a Republican (technically) I'm noticing that I'm less and less "in line" with the party as time goes on. It's especially noticeable to me the last election here...
I need a party that's young and flexible enough to be smart about technology, strong on individual rights and liberties (but balanced with individual responsibility!), and that has the teeth to take on bonehead moves like this. Anonymous doesn't count.
Whole life insurance policies are usually designed to pay out the death benefit if the person in question reaches age 100, since there is no mortality tables calculated beyond that point. I imagine that would change significantly if longer life spans became commonplace.
Doesn't bother me. While I'm sure someone will do something to prove that it can operate just fine on "Vista-or-less-than" OS, do we really care when we've got better options in Chrome, Firefox, Opera, and many more? Oh, I forgot, I need it to run a "Native HTML5 experience", darn them.
Lastly in this litigious society who will you sue if an empty car has an accident? The owner, the coder, or the local government who probably designed a crappy intersection or whatnot that induces the cars to crash at that spot.
All of them?
I read once that the decision on who to sue was always based on who would be able to pony up the most money. To a victim's lawyer, liability is directly related to the potential for profit.
Of course, that's just who to sue FIRST. Parent post is correct, all of them eventually.
I noticed you mentioned Scratch. I posted elsewhere but thought if I replied to you that you might actually notice my comment:)
Stencyl (www.stencyl.com) utilizes "Scratch"-type code blocks along with actual AS3 code (as well as the popular Flixel and Box2D libraries which it is built on) to ease the learning process of programming games. It's in closed beta, but Jon - the founder - has been really interested in the potential uses for educational environments. It might be worth checking it out, I'm in the beta and I really enjoy using the program. It works, and that's what matters.
I'm pleased to be in the beta for Stencyl (http://www.stencyl.com/) and it's an excellent program that works well for people of all experience levels. I'd say I'm a moderate novice when it comes to programming (it's not my job, just a hobby) and Stencyl is powerful enough that it doesn't hold me back with simplistic expectations of what I'll want/be able to do.
Who needs be
My post would be MORE insightful, but the the slashdot effect prevents me from reading the article, and the slashdot code of ethics requires me not to.
That's actually what I was just looking up myself. As best I can tell, it's speed of light for 36.7 -/+ light years. That transmissions going to take a while. I hope their "Battle Opera" is long-running enough to still be around when the get here, hah.
Of course, I'm sure they have a reasonable explanation involving secret knowledge of subspace or other technologically wonderful transmission methods that were secretly used. I'm sure they can explain it "in-canon" with as frequently as the series took them to the past. There was the movie with TOS and the whales. I seem to recall some Ferengi from Deep Space 9 being at Area 51 in an episode. Somebody's got to have left something trivial (to them) behind, right? I mean, how often do you misplace your cell phone?
Honestly I think that there is only one possible benefit to this. Describing the source (via XML3D or Flash or some form of a vector format image) has the potential to reduce the size of images. Need a 1600x1200 image of Earth? That's 46,080,000 bits of data required to represent it. The same thing generated in 3D could be as simple as the number of characters in this comment (sphere plus texture). Even with the texture file needed it's still more efficient.
But I don't want VRML again either.
According to wikipedia Valve's Steam content delivery system was initially released on Sept 12, 2003. I didn't get it at first so I don't know what functions were available at the time - I seem to remember it being mainly used for updates - but it is definitely used to deliver "episodic" content now, particularly audio and video (interactive and otherwise).
I can't imagine that Valve was the first to be doing this either.
With the recent advances in carbon fiber technology, EA thought it would be best to keep up with times. The new NFS game will now include a chance to pimp out your airplanes with neon, spinners, and of course, replacement carbon fiber parts.
Apparently the failure of the SUV racing mode wasn't sufficient, it's time to go bigger and badder! [/sarcasm]
Personally, I'm curious as to how much flex they expect during a regular flight... wouldn't that affect the plane's potential lift force?
Slashdot Mirror
Yes, well the point is to ban magazines with capacities "higher than we want you to have" (aka, anything greater than zero) and not "higher than would normally be used with a weapon of this type".
Separately, and not in relation to the parent post, but since I'm posting right now... the AC are out in force today!
My concern is how difficult is it to accurately re-dock with the mounting/access ring when the stupid thing is behind you?
In response to the "what for?" in the "Uncle hacked hypothesis" a reasonable scenario exists where this would be of benefit to the malware authors. Specifically, having malware alone on a computer doesn't necessarily generate revenue for them, for that they need to use it to obtain something with a more liquid monetary value - such as user/pass credentials for the users bank, etc. In fact, the ideal scenario from a malware author's point of view is that he wants to 1. Infect a computer, 2. Use the infection for gain, and 3. Spread the infection so that #2 can be repeated elsewhere.
I have to agree with Frosty here. The page that is linked in the summary clearly identifies the problem in the section entitled Rationale; "The decline in new contributor growth is the single most serious challenge facing the Wikimedia movement in the year 2011." Unfortunately they come to the wrong conclusion as to how to address the issue with the very next sentence; "Removing the avoidable technical impediments associated with Wikimedia's editing interface is a necessary pre-condition for increasing the number of Wikimedia contributors."
Quite frankly, it's obvious that the "technical impediments" of the editing interface are not to blame or else there would not currently be 4,099,684 pages of content (which excludes an additional 24,635,011 "other" pages - source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Statistics ) as I type this. No, as Frosty P. states the problem is with the drama that comes with attempting to edit or create articles on Wikipedia. Rampant deletionism (which wasn't a thing before Wikipedia, hah!) abounds and new users are driven away in frustration. In short, they need to work on getting their current volunteers to operate in a more welcoming manner.
No doubt a majority of the problem is caused by a minority of the editors, but like everything else the vocal minority will out-influence a silent majority. This is the problem.
There's been a lot of back and forth revision of the definition over the years. I remember it was originally something like "Any object used outside of its natural scope to achieve a goal." Then people realized this meant otters used stones as tools to open clams so it became "Any object that has been modified to increase efficiency for a purpose outside of its natural scope." Then we had video of apes stripping leaves from branches to stick them in anthills... and the revision continues on ad infinitum because heaven forbid that humans have to share the title of "Tool-maker/user" with lesser beings.
When installers ask me if I want a short-cut to their wiz-bang application I cringe.
I cringe more when they don't ask and just do it anyway. Serious pet-peeve.
It seems that everything on Android does this. The first thing I do after installing something is to remove the shortcut from the main pages. I have a whole screen with nothing but my apps - why would I want that on my main screen too?
As an aside, Code Monkey's is currently on Netflix instant streaming. I've been watching it since my path was the opposite (knew the song, never saw the show).
I don't know if you have an Android but whenever I download apps there's always a list of permissions it will have. That alone probably constitutes a degree of permission by the user, I'm sure.
I've a friend that's flip-flopped from telling me I needed an iPhone (when I got a Galaxy SII) to telling me how wonderful his wife's Galaxy SIII is. He's not even a tech-type guy and he's talked about the Apple vs. Samsung trial specifically because he wants to get a Galaxy SIII for himself soon.
Customers are fickle (outside of the the fanboy spectrum) and will jump on whatever is "hot" at the time. That's the whole purpose of the "walled garden" that Apple - and yes, Google "Play Store" also - encourages. It's an attempt to lock people into a specific set of devices (ones that you profit from) by discouraging change. Who wants to lose music, games, etc just because there's a new device out that is a little better? The better they can convince people to stay, the more money they can extract.
So yes, outside of the walling of the gardens, I suspect people want those choices. I would find it really interesting to see people genuinely upset that they're getting taken away from them.
USB webcam is a great and inexpensive way to go. My dad did this very thing one time - leave it on and set to record when it senses motion. A windy day left him with a bit of extra footage when the bushes would shake, but he also got every single car and person that drove/walked by on the sidewalk.
As a Kentuckian I'm extremely disappointed that the sponsor would even think something of this nature is a good idea. As a Republican (technically) I'm noticing that I'm less and less "in line" with the party as time goes on. It's especially noticeable to me the last election here... I need a party that's young and flexible enough to be smart about technology, strong on individual rights and liberties (but balanced with individual responsibility!), and that has the teeth to take on bonehead moves like this. Anonymous doesn't count.
Whole life insurance policies are usually designed to pay out the death benefit if the person in question reaches age 100, since there is no mortality tables calculated beyond that point. I imagine that would change significantly if longer life spans became commonplace.
If they paid in coins, you might say exact change would be even easier than with dollar bills. No "rounding" required in that case :)
Now that it's banned on twitter, it'll be the number one trending topic.
Aye or Nay. Which one means yes?
Doesn't bother me. While I'm sure someone will do something to prove that it can operate just fine on "Vista-or-less-than" OS, do we really care when we've got better options in Chrome, Firefox, Opera, and many more? Oh, I forgot, I need it to run a "Native HTML5 experience", darn them.
All of them?
I read once that the decision on who to sue was always based on who would be able to pony up the most money. To a victim's lawyer, liability is directly related to the potential for profit. Of course, that's just who to sue FIRST. Parent post is correct, all of them eventually.
Step 4 is really a mystery, because Step 3, "Banning customers" doesn't naturally lead to Step 5, "Profit!!!" in any way, shape, or form.
I noticed you mentioned Scratch. I posted elsewhere but thought if I replied to you that you might actually notice my comment :)
Stencyl (www.stencyl.com) utilizes "Scratch"-type code blocks along with actual AS3 code (as well as the popular Flixel and Box2D libraries which it is built on) to ease the learning process of programming games. It's in closed beta, but Jon - the founder - has been really interested in the potential uses for educational environments. It might be worth checking it out, I'm in the beta and I really enjoy using the program. It works, and that's what matters.
I'm pleased to be in the beta for Stencyl (http://www.stencyl.com/) and it's an excellent program that works well for people of all experience levels. I'd say I'm a moderate novice when it comes to programming (it's not my job, just a hobby) and Stencyl is powerful enough that it doesn't hold me back with simplistic expectations of what I'll want/be able to do.
Who needs be My post would be MORE insightful, but the the slashdot effect prevents me from reading the article, and the slashdot code of ethics requires me not to.
That's actually what I was just looking up myself. As best I can tell, it's speed of light for 36.7 -/+ light years. That transmissions going to take a while. I hope their "Battle Opera" is long-running enough to still be around when the get here, hah. Of course, I'm sure they have a reasonable explanation involving secret knowledge of subspace or other technologically wonderful transmission methods that were secretly used. I'm sure they can explain it "in-canon" with as frequently as the series took them to the past. There was the movie with TOS and the whales. I seem to recall some Ferengi from Deep Space 9 being at Area 51 in an episode. Somebody's got to have left something trivial (to them) behind, right? I mean, how often do you misplace your cell phone?
Honestly I think that there is only one possible benefit to this. Describing the source (via XML3D or Flash or some form of a vector format image) has the potential to reduce the size of images. Need a 1600x1200 image of Earth? That's 46,080,000 bits of data required to represent it. The same thing generated in 3D could be as simple as the number of characters in this comment (sphere plus texture). Even with the texture file needed it's still more efficient. But I don't want VRML again either.
According to wikipedia Valve's Steam content delivery system was initially released on Sept 12, 2003. I didn't get it at first so I don't know what functions were available at the time - I seem to remember it being mainly used for updates - but it is definitely used to deliver "episodic" content now, particularly audio and video (interactive and otherwise). I can't imagine that Valve was the first to be doing this either.
With the recent advances in carbon fiber technology, EA thought it would be best to keep up with times. The new NFS game will now include a chance to pimp out your airplanes with neon, spinners, and of course, replacement carbon fiber parts.
Apparently the failure of the SUV racing mode wasn't sufficient, it's time to go bigger and badder!
[/sarcasm]
Personally, I'm curious as to how much flex they expect during a regular flight... wouldn't that affect the plane's potential lift force?