I acknowledge that it's got it's own potential problems, but perhaps some form of encrypted MS/Intel key before the 'chip' allows a kernel change? Since it's not a change that is performed constantly, a few seconds for verification of a complex key isn't a big deal when waiting for software to patch. Just a suggestion.
Definitely a good clarification... obviously I don't feel that everyone should be proficient in all forms of technology, but the stupidity I tend to refer to is the lack of initiative to learn and understand and grow along with the times and technology. While you may not be able to fix your car, your'e surely intelligent enough to follow a maintenance schedule, and use a good amount of common sense if you suspect something's wrong with it. It's not 100% self reliance in terms of remedying the situation, but you know who to bring it to, and you take the initiative to do so. You're not waiting for someone to say "You know, you ought to get that fixed." It's the same kind of ignorance for people who never bother to learn how to change a flat tire, despite having a jack, spare tire, and instructions right on board. There's a big difference between opting to call AAA and not do it yourself and calling, and saying "that's too complicated for me, I'll figure out some solution if and when it happens."
The common "stupidity" trend I'm referring to is the difference between being willing to learn or at least seek your own answers and assistance, and just throwing up your arms and saying "Oh, it's just technical gibberish, so I'm going to ignore it." It seems a lot of those who ignore it blame someone else later on.
Problems will always arise, and unfortunately there will always be victims to unforseen things. But to continue using a Windows computer without using updated virus protection, updated versions and patches, and the basic common sense to spend 10 minutes a day reading up or asking others about the latest risks is just plain ignorant. After a while, you can't keep blaming someone else when you do nothing.
It's like the idiot lights in cars... they try to make things easier for people to understand, but people just continue to ignore the risks and go on using it anyways. There needs to be common sense, and the desire to continue to learn about what you might not understand.
Another point - I don't know much about biology, either, but I know enough to go to the recommended visits, and follow the doctor's orders. The rest is basic common sense. Some things you just can't avoid, but you can't blame the doctor for your own lack of action.
Yes, the "War on ____" is cliche, but it's mostly the result of the media. Nobody honestly compares those things to real war.
And yeah, Europe saw some real conflict in the first half of the 20th century, but it's certainly not like the Americans didn't witness it.
I'm assuming you're not American by your post, so you may not be as aware that today's the anniversary of Japan's attack on Pearl Harbor. It may not have been a US State at that point, and Japan may not have declared war beforehand, but I think that clearly constitutes "war." I'm sure many an American slashdot reader has a relative, possibly a grandfather or grandfather's brother who is buried in Europe.
Yes, it's been a while since we've had a war on our soil, but the same goes for you. While I don't know your age, it's a safe bet you weren't alive to remember WWII. So let's not start in on who here has experienced a true war. Your city may have, but you haven't.
You know, honestly, we've been fighting stupidity for quite some time now. More and more it seems like most of my fellow Americans want someone else to take responsibility, and someone else to take care of their problems for them. There's a general lack of desire to be intelligent or self-reliant. With advancing technology, more and more people begin to fall behind... it's getting to a point where people just aren't smart enough to take care of themselves.
Oddly, I happened to have read the Wikipedia article on Extinction Events recently, and was intrigued. I see myself as fairly well educated, engineering degree and all that, and always curious about science. However, I'd always assumed that extinction events were the result of drastic sudden changes, or catastrophic events, such as meteors and the like.
But not only is that not necessarily the case, extinction events are apparently much more common than I'd ever imagined. It put a different perspective on things, and I think most people are completely unawares that extinctions aren't the end of the world, or Earthly Life... only the end of certain types of it. There's a long history of it happening without human existence, so why is it that we think it shouldn't happen when we're alive?
I think that episode is where the tide of the show turned away from only busting the myths. They determined that it was do-able, but then proceeded to take the additional step of obliterating the cement truck with way, WAY too many lbs of explosives. I'm not saying I didn't enjoy watching it, but it seemed like they were getting a little off-topic, and moving on to simple wanton destruction after they'd satisfied the myth. Personally, I wonder if that was because they were bored, or because the producers were well aware that the demographic that tends to watch the show also tends to enjoy large explosions.
between slapping a new badge on a car, and re-badging a processor. It's funny when someone does it to their own property, but a real shame when a retailer does it to a consumer.
You bring up a good point, in terms of damage to people's personal identity and information. What's the risk for corporations, or perhaps government sensitive information? It might lead to the kind of backlash where places that don't absolutely need internet access for the required work to be disconnected, or on a separate internal network. I just think there may be too many companies going low tech to avoid this kind of threat, and pulling the plug if they have anything serious to risk.
That's exactly the case. I waited 'til this time last year to get a DVD recorder drive for my computer. Why? I waited until the price of the "all formats in one" drives became dirt cheap. That way, I know I can do whatever it is that I might want to do. I know many people weren't willing to wait that long, but the impatient ones tend to be more tech-savvy and more informed anyways. Average Joe who just wants the next best thing is not going to buy 2 boxes that, as far as he's concerned, do the same thing. And he's certainly not going to read in-depth as to what format provides which features... he'll just buy whichever one Consumer Reports (*wince*)tells him to.
Rape is still irresponsible behavior. It's just one of many that happens to not adversely affect the irresponsible party. Much like problems of gun control and drunk driving, a culture must adress the question of who bears the responsibility... perhaps not for each instance, but for the problem as a whole.
Both AIDS and rape are problems to be addressed by everyone, not just rapists/victims or HIV+ people. Often times, the responsibility supercedes those who are to blame.
Not to be pedantic, but it's "Coke Zero" and "Pepsi One."
The name "Coke" itself is a trademark on a common name. Nobody doubts that you can't claim the rights to the words "Zero" and "One" even if you're talking about cola calories.
So the modifier itself isn't protected, just the overall phrase containing the originally copyrighted name.
Windows itself shouldn't be copyrighted. Just "Microsoft" and "Microsoft Windows." So a modifier like 'Defender' added to a modifier like 'windows' should not infringe on anything.
This reminds me of the Futurama episode about Popplers. The discovery of a new snack food prompts a search for a marketable name, and the only 2 names not trademarked are 'popplers' and 'zitzels.'
How long before all the common words are trademarked, and you can't even make a new company name without infringing on someone else's?
Though you'd have to appreciate the fact that if these were implemented in power generation for public utilities, some of that power would be used for cooking poultry...
Though I'd assume more of it would also go towards powering many, many fans.
I work at a DoD contractor, as a MechE. Our desktops don't have classified info on them, so the aforementioned gadgets won't allow a leakage of any serious secrets. But a camera is a big-time risk, as I could theoretically take pictures of machinery or classified drawings. It's standard practice for classified computers to be on an independent network and behind locked doors, and visitors (with the proper security clearance) are forbidden to bring in any recordable media or storage devices to the area. I can always leave my phone in the car, but that's a rather big waste.
Lots of health clubs, gyms, and medical facilities also ban camera phones for privacy assurance.
This is what happens when gadgets become more appealing to non-gadget oriented people. When it's a social statement for everyone to have the latest and greatest thing, the features quickly become superficial in terms of their actual usefulness or quality. A cell phone that has a camera, takes videos, displays TV, plays music, and whatever else is all very cute, but they're only widespread because those features signify the latest and therefore the best in the public eye. I'm not saying not to make these features in a gadget. But make a *quality* gadget that's not a cheap POS that was rushed out the door so the gotta-have-its can be the first to be seen with it. I want my phone to be a phone. That's it. My job prohibits a camera phone. Which would be fine, if it wasn't for the fact that because of the current trend, a phone without a camera is automatically the cheapest quality phone available. I just want a phone with a sharp screen, long battery life, voice dialing, and menus that don't have a half-second lag time behind button pushes. And that's it. And I can't manage to find one.
If I want a digital camera, I'll buy one. Same with a music player, video player, TV, or video camera. And no contracts, either.
Yeah, I saw that in the article, which I did read first. But "crash tested" to what standards? US? Japanese? Honda's? Anyones? Side? Frontal? It doesn't even say it actually passed, just that it was tested. And they certainly don't provide the info.
My car is crash tested too, but I can look up the reports.
Maybe I wasn't clear enough in the original post. Just because Bill Gates says Internet Exporer is safe doesn't make it so. I don't see why you believe anyone who says something's been crash tested but doesn't provide any proof or further mention thereof.
I don't know how unsafe the car is, but I do question the legality of it. State gov'ts, particularly California, have stringent requirements for car safety. How does this pass the testing and registration requirements in order for it to be driven on the street? I know a non-production vehicle doesn't need to conform to the same standards, but it still can't pose a hazard to others. I'm not saying it's a rolling bomb, but does the state or the general public have any reassurance that this thing can survive a crash? The guy driving it seems to place his faith solely in the company itself without asking for any proof. I'd be quite ticked if my state allowed standard safety rules to be circumvented for the sake of a company test trial, particularly when it could affect people who aren't in the car.
Actually, it's not usually you that makes the methane, it's the bacteria that took up residence inside feasting on what your body didn't finish breaking down. Which is all fine and normal, but raises the question of why more research isn't done into using bacteria to produce useful fuel. Particularly if you used something like solar energy to provide the bacteria with warmth. IANA biologist, but I think it's something to look into, at least.
It seems that most of his quotes seem to deride the geek community, particularly gamers, as somehow not being as intelligent as he is. I'm not surprised at all that he's gotten this kind of backlash, particularly from a group that typically doesn't like to let an issued a challenge go ignored.
I'm also surprised that he hasn't been more thoroughly bashed by Penny Arcade. I would have expected some sort of Fruit F*cker episode gone wrong.
Climate change becomes a serious problem for the survival of the human race? Are we minimalizing our environmental impact for the sake of the Earth and it's non-human critters? What happens when the Earth's climate becomes unfavorable to the point where humans decide to change the environment to suit our own survival? At what point do we say "screw environmentalism, it's time to induce global cooling measures?"
I comprehend the reasons for minimalizing our global impact, but the fact of the matter is that we do impact the environment, and we will continue to do so for all fo the forseeable future. Maybe we should consider keeping the earth's climate similar to the climate in which mankind evolved, even if it involves more meddling. Personally, I don't know why people would embrace another ice age. Canada would be entirely covered.
Slashdot Mirror
I acknowledge that it's got it's own potential problems, but perhaps some form of encrypted MS/Intel key before the 'chip' allows a kernel change? Since it's not a change that is performed constantly, a few seconds for verification of a complex key isn't a big deal when waiting for software to patch. Just a suggestion.
Definitely a good clarification... obviously I don't feel that everyone should be proficient in all forms of technology, but the stupidity I tend to refer to is the lack of initiative to learn and understand and grow along with the times and technology. While you may not be able to fix your car, your'e surely intelligent enough to follow a maintenance schedule, and use a good amount of common sense if you suspect something's wrong with it. It's not 100% self reliance in terms of remedying the situation, but you know who to bring it to, and you take the initiative to do so. You're not waiting for someone to say "You know, you ought to get that fixed." It's the same kind of ignorance for people who never bother to learn how to change a flat tire, despite having a jack, spare tire, and instructions right on board. There's a big difference between opting to call AAA and not do it yourself and calling, and saying "that's too complicated for me, I'll figure out some solution if and when it happens."
The common "stupidity" trend I'm referring to is the difference between being willing to learn or at least seek your own answers and assistance, and just throwing up your arms and saying "Oh, it's just technical gibberish, so I'm going to ignore it." It seems a lot of those who ignore it blame someone else later on.
Problems will always arise, and unfortunately there will always be victims to unforseen things. But to continue using a Windows computer without using updated virus protection, updated versions and patches, and the basic common sense to spend 10 minutes a day reading up or asking others about the latest risks is just plain ignorant. After a while, you can't keep blaming someone else when you do nothing.
It's like the idiot lights in cars... they try to make things easier for people to understand, but people just continue to ignore the risks and go on using it anyways. There needs to be common sense, and the desire to continue to learn about what you might not understand.
Another point - I don't know much about biology, either, but I know enough to go to the recommended visits, and follow the doctor's orders. The rest is basic common sense. Some things you just can't avoid, but you can't blame the doctor for your own lack of action.
the 64th anniversary of the Attack on Pearl Habor.
OMFG... conspiracy! There must be a connection somewhere.
Just let me think of it, and I'll get back to you...
Yes, the "War on ____" is cliche, but it's mostly the result of the media. Nobody honestly compares those things to real war.
And yeah, Europe saw some real conflict in the first half of the 20th century, but it's certainly not like the Americans didn't witness it.
I'm assuming you're not American by your post, so you may not be as aware that today's the anniversary of Japan's attack on Pearl Harbor. It may not have been a US State at that point, and Japan may not have declared war beforehand, but I think that clearly constitutes "war." I'm sure many an American slashdot reader has a relative, possibly a grandfather or grandfather's brother who is buried in Europe.
Yes, it's been a while since we've had a war on our soil, but the same goes for you. While I don't know your age, it's a safe bet you weren't alive to remember WWII. So let's not start in on who here has experienced a true war. Your city may have, but you haven't.
You know, honestly, we've been fighting stupidity for quite some time now. More and more it seems like most of my fellow Americans want someone else to take responsibility, and someone else to take care of their problems for them. There's a general lack of desire to be intelligent or self-reliant. With advancing technology, more and more people begin to fall behind... it's getting to a point where people just aren't smart enough to take care of themselves.
Well, I guess drinking a few Irish Coffees a day isn't as bad for your liver as you thought it was.
Kind of reminds me of my senior year in college, when I realized most of my vitamin C came from the screwdrivers I drank.
Oddly, I happened to have read the Wikipedia article on Extinction Events recently, and was intrigued. I see myself as fairly well educated, engineering degree and all that, and always curious about science. However, I'd always assumed that extinction events were the result of drastic sudden changes, or catastrophic events, such as meteors and the like.
But not only is that not necessarily the case, extinction events are apparently much more common than I'd ever imagined. It put a different perspective on things, and I think most people are completely unawares that extinctions aren't the end of the world, or Earthly Life... only the end of certain types of it. There's a long history of it happening without human existence, so why is it that we think it shouldn't happen when we're alive?
was that someone, once and for all, wanted to get rid of the C in the goatse URL.
It's too bad, really. 8 years ago, that name would have had nerds everywhere laughing. And secretly hoping.
I think that episode is where the tide of the show turned away from only busting the myths. They determined that it was do-able, but then proceeded to take the additional step of obliterating the cement truck with way, WAY too many lbs of explosives. I'm not saying I didn't enjoy watching it, but it seemed like they were getting a little off-topic, and moving on to simple wanton destruction after they'd satisfied the myth.
Personally, I wonder if that was because they were bored, or because the producers were well aware that the demographic that tends to watch the show also tends to enjoy large explosions.
between slapping a new badge on a car, and re-badging a processor. It's funny when someone does it to their own property, but a real shame when a retailer does it to a consumer.
You bring up a good point, in terms of damage to people's personal identity and information. What's the risk for corporations, or perhaps government sensitive information? It might lead to the kind of backlash where places that don't absolutely need internet access for the required work to be disconnected, or on a separate internal network. I just think there may be too many companies going low tech to avoid this kind of threat, and pulling the plug if they have anything serious to risk.
That's exactly the case. I waited 'til this time last year to get a DVD recorder drive for my computer. Why? I waited until the price of the "all formats in one" drives became dirt cheap. That way, I know I can do whatever it is that I might want to do. I know many people weren't willing to wait that long, but the impatient ones tend to be more tech-savvy and more informed anyways.
Average Joe who just wants the next best thing is not going to buy 2 boxes that, as far as he's concerned, do the same thing. And he's certainly not going to read in-depth as to what format provides which features... he'll just buy whichever one Consumer Reports (*wince*)tells him to.
Rape is still irresponsible behavior. It's just one of many that happens to not adversely affect the irresponsible party. Much like problems of gun control and drunk driving, a culture must adress the question of who bears the responsibility... perhaps not for each instance, but for the problem as a whole.
Both AIDS and rape are problems to be addressed by everyone, not just rapists/victims or HIV+ people. Often times, the responsibility supercedes those who are to blame.
Bart: Dad, do I have to brush my teeth?
Homer: No, but at least rinse your mouth out with soda.
Bart After Dark
Not to be pedantic, but it's "Coke Zero" and "Pepsi One."
The name "Coke" itself is a trademark on a common name. Nobody doubts that you can't claim the rights to the words "Zero" and "One" even if you're talking about cola calories.
So the modifier itself isn't protected, just the overall phrase containing the originally copyrighted name.
Windows itself shouldn't be copyrighted. Just "Microsoft" and "Microsoft Windows." So a modifier like 'Defender' added to a modifier like 'windows' should not infringe on anything.
This reminds me of the Futurama episode about Popplers. The discovery of a new snack food prompts a search for a marketable name, and the only 2 names not trademarked are 'popplers' and 'zitzels.'
How long before all the common words are trademarked, and you can't even make a new company name without infringing on someone else's?
Though you'd have to appreciate the fact that if these were implemented in power generation for public utilities, some of that power would be used for cooking poultry...
Though I'd assume more of it would also go towards powering many, many fans.
I work at a DoD contractor, as a MechE. Our desktops don't have classified info on them, so the aforementioned gadgets won't allow a leakage of any serious secrets. But a camera is a big-time risk, as I could theoretically take pictures of machinery or classified drawings.
It's standard practice for classified computers to be on an independent network and behind locked doors, and visitors (with the proper security clearance) are forbidden to bring in any recordable media or storage devices to the area.
I can always leave my phone in the car, but that's a rather big waste.
Lots of health clubs, gyms, and medical facilities also ban camera phones for privacy assurance.
This is what happens when gadgets become more appealing to non-gadget oriented people. When it's a social statement for everyone to have the latest and greatest thing, the features quickly become superficial in terms of their actual usefulness or quality. A cell phone that has a camera, takes videos, displays TV, plays music, and whatever else is all very cute, but they're only widespread because those features signify the latest and therefore the best in the public eye.
I'm not saying not to make these features in a gadget. But make a *quality* gadget that's not a cheap POS that was rushed out the door so the gotta-have-its can be the first to be seen with it.
I want my phone to be a phone. That's it. My job prohibits a camera phone. Which would be fine, if it wasn't for the fact that because of the current trend, a phone without a camera is automatically the cheapest quality phone available.
I just want a phone with a sharp screen, long battery life, voice dialing, and menus that don't have a half-second lag time behind button pushes. And that's it. And I can't manage to find one.
If I want a digital camera, I'll buy one. Same with a music player, video player, TV, or video camera. And no contracts, either.
Yeah, I saw that in the article, which I did read first. But "crash tested" to what standards? US? Japanese? Honda's? Anyones? Side? Frontal? It doesn't even say it actually passed, just that it was tested. And they certainly don't provide the info.
My car is crash tested too, but I can look up the reports.
Maybe I wasn't clear enough in the original post. Just because Bill Gates says Internet Exporer is safe doesn't make it so. I don't see why you believe anyone who says something's been crash tested but doesn't provide any proof or further mention thereof.
I don't know how unsafe the car is, but I do question the legality of it. State gov'ts, particularly California, have stringent requirements for car safety. How does this pass the testing and registration requirements in order for it to be driven on the street? I know a non-production vehicle doesn't need to conform to the same standards, but it still can't pose a hazard to others. I'm not saying it's a rolling bomb, but does the state or the general public have any reassurance that this thing can survive a crash? The guy driving it seems to place his faith solely in the company itself without asking for any proof. I'd be quite ticked if my state allowed standard safety rules to be circumvented for the sake of a company test trial, particularly when it could affect people who aren't in the car.
Actually, it's not usually you that makes the methane, it's the bacteria that took up residence inside feasting on what your body didn't finish breaking down. Which is all fine and normal, but raises the question of why more research isn't done into using bacteria to produce useful fuel. Particularly if you used something like solar energy to provide the bacteria with warmth. IANA biologist, but I think it's something to look into, at least.
It seems that most of his quotes seem to deride the geek community, particularly gamers, as somehow not being as intelligent as he is. I'm not surprised at all that he's gotten this kind of backlash, particularly from a group that typically doesn't like to let an issued a challenge go ignored.
I'm also surprised that he hasn't been more thoroughly bashed by Penny Arcade. I would have expected some sort of Fruit F*cker episode gone wrong.
Slashdotters are well aware that there's a big step between living and reproducing. Good luck.
Climate change becomes a serious problem for the survival of the human race? Are we minimalizing our environmental impact for the sake of the Earth and it's non-human critters? What happens when the Earth's climate becomes unfavorable to the point where humans decide to change the environment to suit our own survival? At what point do we say "screw environmentalism, it's time to induce global cooling measures?"
I comprehend the reasons for minimalizing our global impact, but the fact of the matter is that we do impact the environment, and we will continue to do so for all fo the forseeable future. Maybe we should consider keeping the earth's climate similar to the climate in which mankind evolved, even if it involves more meddling. Personally, I don't know why people would embrace another ice age. Canada would be entirely covered.