Could it be because just as the US goes to war with Germany, Japan convieniently declares war on the US?
Except this is factually incorrect.
Japan attacked the US *then* Hitler declared war on the US, not visa-versa; believing Japan had delivered a knockout sucker punch. The US never declared war on either.
The fire bombing of Dresden was carried out by RAF Bomber Command, not by the American Air Force and was in retaliation for the Luftwaffe bombing (flattening) of Coventry. Which was carried out in response to previous Bombing by the allies; all the way back until the now known to be accidental (by navigation rrror) bombing (actually dumping) of London in Aug 1940.
And there lies the difference. These terrorists had no reason to escalate, US Forces conducted no similar actions on Saudi or Afghanistan. Indeed the US aided both these states in the recent past against outside aggression.
Libertarians are FAR closer to Republicans than they are to Greens or Democrats
Libertarians can be social, economic or both. A true libertarian would be both and believes in equality of opportunity *both* socially and economically. A true libertarian is Darwinian. These are anti-capitalistic, since capital is a lever of ability, not a measure of it.
Greens (and Democrats) are socially liberal but economically centrist, as such are only half way off a true Libertarian on one axis, the economic, and very similar on the alternate social axis.
Republicans are socially conservative or even authoritarian; this is at least half off the social axis. Republicans promote the status quo, are anti-progressive, pro-capitalistic and pro-monopolistic, again at least half way off a true libertarian.
Therefore Green and Democrat are certainly closer to a true libertarian than republicans.
If something is true it is be definition not a hoax.
The simple fact is Jedi was recorded as a statically significant sample, it was recognised by the census, it was categorised by the census, and the result will be published in the census results, in due course.
http://www.statistics.gov.uk/census2001/pdfs/sec ti on5part3.pdf
If it walks like a duck, quacks like a duck and looks like a duck you may as well call it a duck.
Jedi was recognised in the recent UK census as a statically significant category. http://www.statistics.gov.uk/census2001 /pdfs/secti on5part3.pdf (Page 18)
However what I found really interesting was some of the other choices in the ~150 different categories including:
Scientology Nearly 100 different versions of Christianity. Heathen, Atheist, Agnostic, Realist, Idealist, Rationalist, Humanist, Secularist.
He is on a self confessed power grab and frankly the guy has VERY scarey ideals. Adopting the lesser of two evils is not a choice I'm prepared to support.
We keep pondering flicking the power switch on the core switch one day, just to see how much people suddenly realise their IT network means to them.. I'd give it about 1 minute before we got hassle from senior management asking when the network was due back up.
Make it a pre-planned outage during working hours for essential mainternance, it makes your point but reinforces it with a view that you are also pro-active.
What you really need is generics (as in C++ templates). Java collections are vile, since they suffer from type loss even when used with "real" objects. I'm surprised that didn't come into this top ten; it's a major language deficiency.
I should have predicted this! What is it about generics advocates ? You never quit harping on about this even though generics have been repeatedly rejected by the JCP.
Java needs Generics like a People need holes in their heads. They are pointless, cannot be added without badley breaking the VM, they add nothing except complexity; produce code bloat, break type safety and are hated by the real OO experts, because they are a crutch for people who do not understand polymorphism.
I'm really forced to wonder about the motivation of people who want to so badly break Java.
They [RIAA/MPAA] are using copyright as an argument to introduce Berman's law. However they don't need to prove anything; it gives them a blanket immunity.
Having a good 'motivation' is no defence against breaking the law, indeed it would make the prosecution easier because one of the three pillars (means, motive & oppportunity) of a successful prosecution is handed over on a plate.
Indeed, this would also be illegal in the UK under Section 1 of the 'The Computer Misuse Act 1990';
(1) A person is guilty of an offence if--
(a) he causes a computer to perform any function with intent to secure access to any program or data held in any computer;
(b) the access he intends to secure is unauthorised; and
(c) he knows at the time when he causes the computer to perform the function that that is the case. (2) The intent a person has to have to commit an offence under this section need not be directed at--
(a) any particular program or data;
(b) a program or data of any particular kind; or
(c) a program or data held in any particular computer. (3) A person guilty of an offence under this section shall be liable on summary conviction to imprisonment for a term not exceeding six months or to a fine not exceeding level 5 on the standard scale or to both.
As for the possibility of Tony Blair (UK Prime-Minister), some how excusing this, that is not likely. There is plenty of separation between the UK Judiciary and Politicians. UK Judges are not elected but appointed and once appointed are nearly impossible to remove. UK Judges also seem to regularly take delight in giving politicians the finger, when the latter attempt to step on their toes. i.e. http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/2162940.stm
I'm sure the outrage helped to speed things alone, however reading between the lines, putting my ear to the rumours mill has it that Felton serious overstepped the mark, went against policy and is lucky to still have a job.
Um, Microsoft rules eh; if that's not ms-troll I don't know what is...
However you are missing the point; setting aside it should have been implemented as assert and not Assert, it was the none standard behaviour in what was supposed to be an ANSI compliant C++ that is the real issue. So yes, that behaviour is none standard, and since practically every C++ programmer I know, who used VC++ including some world class acts and apparently plenty of slashdotters, fell for it. It is the Microsoft convention that was/is wrong, it is counter intuitive, so yes it was/is YAMB (Yet Another Microsoft Bug). The MASM segmentation alignment issue is the another example of the same attitude. We are always right and that is the way it works,
that is the way it works, so you are wrong,
if you are wrong, we are right;
we are always right. ad nausium..
So that is why when Microsoft break a convention or standard and the fault is everybody elses.
Well frankly you need to grow up and down scale your ego, think freely instead engaging in group think and start listerning to others. Don't you know the customer is always right. So if we raise something, you should appologise for wasting my time, thank me for the contribution, and don't under any circumstance imply I'm stupid simply because my opinion differs. That really pisses me off about Microsoft consultants ops I mean 'evangelists'. I wonder what prat though it a good idea to send out 'evangelists' to preach 'belief' to 'Engineers'?
The best laugh I ever got at an evangelists expense was telling him that nature provided him one mouth and two ears and perhaps he should use them in that ratio and then he may understand our requirements. Did he shut up ? Well for about 3 seconds, before launching into his spiel.
So yes, none standard behaviour is YAMB (Yet Another Microsoft Bug), it is not RTFM.
It also starting to Look like Valenti has been forced to back down.
http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/6/26402.htm l
Now they are on the run do NOT take this as victory and relax. I advocate moving onto the attack and pressing home the advantage. Tell your friends 'Look what they tried to do', tell them the MPAA/RIAA et. al. need to be watched they are trying to steal your rights, If we Geeks where not on the ball they may have suceeded. They still could. In short, rope likely future allies into the victory.
I'd report them to the Police under Section 1 of the Computer Misuse Act 1990. The police would collect all the evidence under criminal law, for me. The UK/US has a extradition treaty, so the 'Consultants' would spend upto 6 years in Jail for each attack/Offence. The Management that ordered the attack would spend upto 12 years in Jail for count of conspiracy. I sue them under civil law and gain a default judgement, because they've already been convicted under the heavier burden of criminal law. I would claim for punitive damages since the damage was wilful. I would then gain an Anton Pillon Order and cease assets cash/takings from their Cinemas and Stores.
Trust/Karma should be open ended and climb with diminishing returns making it more difficult to whore.
I trust the bank to meet my cheques, I don't trust it to keep my privacy. I may trust a usenet poster to paraphase articles accuratly, but not his judgement in drawing conclusions. I may trust a poster to debunk UFO myths, but not his Politics. Therefore, Trust/Karma should against a set of seperate attributes/objectives.
but the editorializer has clearly overstated the scope and effect of this bill. This seems to be a common tactic of those who rabidly defend an anti-copyright position with regards to modern file sharing.
So what ? you know it, I know, the poster knows it.
What you are forgetting is that Geeks are mirroring a 'common tactic' because it WORKS, we've been taught that lesson by some of the best practitioners of the FUD in the world.
The real question is why YOU oppose any effective technique?
Competence or excellence is not intrinsic to any nationality. As somebody who considers himself an elite geek I feel significant more affinity to a skilled 'foreigner' than to a mediocre or incompetent of my own nationality/race. Indeed in the past I've recruited Indian contractors to work on my team. They show the same spread as British engineers some are inept, the majority are competent, some are good or great.
In the past I've been offered better paid positions in London and the US with H1B however I declined, the work was boring. I'm motivated by doing interesting/challenging work. I don't want to spend all day doing CRUD, I find it boring and unmotivating. That is why I work on this project (www.kitv.co.uk). AIH earn 30K UKP (~45K USD/EUR), a good salary for a UK provincial Software Engineer, enough to keep me supplied with toys. However that is dwarfed by what I could earn in the London or the USA.
It appears to me that many US IT professional have priced themselves out of the market, it's a economics 101 issue. I'm forced to wonder what motivated these individuals complaining about the H1B issue to be IT Professionals in the first place. It sounds financial to me, the people that respond, "it's a good career/money/opportunity" to the question "why did you choose computing ?" and not "I like to hack/play/mess with computers". They have no a passion for the subject, no geeky-ness, and as a result will only ever be mediocre, at best. In my mind that is the give away clue, they are complaining about their own limitations.
That is very low bit rate for real-time encoded video stream, what is the encoding standard (MPEG2) ? What is the quality like?
We use industrial strength encoders from Tandberg, pretty much the best money can buy and we achieve an acceptable quality of video at 3Mbps real-time and 1.5Mbps off-line encoding
TIVO must be pretty poor picture quality and generate a lot of artefacts at 1.5Mbps realtime.
That is the distance from the POP usually an exchange, the actual coverage is a trade secret but it is a *lot more* than a niche market. We can reach the rest though active street cabinet.
The storage requirements are *less* for a server side solution only one copy and reference count is needed even if million's of consumers record a program. On a client side PVR a million copies are stored it is massively less efficient.
Yes, the KIT service is much more than just PVR, DTV+EPG is the core, VOD, Internet Access and a range of localised Web-Services, Pizza Deliver, Local Government, Health Services are all included.
Slashdot Mirror
Could it be because just as the US goes to war with Germany, Japan convieniently declares war on the US?
Except this is factually incorrect.
Japan attacked the US *then* Hitler declared war on the US, not visa-versa; believing Japan had delivered a knockout sucker punch. The US never declared war on either.
Yes Different, but not for reason you state.
The fire bombing of Dresden was carried out by RAF Bomber Command, not by the American Air Force and was in retaliation for the Luftwaffe bombing (flattening) of Coventry. Which was carried out in response to previous Bombing by the allies; all the way back until the now known to be accidental (by navigation rrror) bombing (actually dumping) of London in Aug 1940.
And there lies the difference. These terrorists had no reason to escalate, US Forces conducted no similar actions on Saudi or Afghanistan. Indeed the US aided both these states in the recent past against outside aggression.
Libertarians are FAR closer to Republicans than they are to Greens or Democrats
Libertarians can be social, economic or both. A true libertarian would be both and believes in equality of opportunity *both* socially and economically. A true libertarian is Darwinian. These are anti-capitalistic, since capital is a lever of ability, not a measure of it.
Greens (and Democrats) are socially liberal but economically centrist, as such are only half way off a true Libertarian on one axis, the economic, and very similar on the alternate social axis.
Republicans are socially conservative or even authoritarian; this is at least half off the social axis. Republicans promote the status quo, are anti-progressive, pro-capitalistic and pro-monopolistic, again at least half way off a true libertarian.
Therefore Green and Democrat are certainly closer to a true libertarian than republicans.
If something is true it is be definition not a hoax.
c ti on5part3.pdf
The simple fact is Jedi was recorded as a statically significant sample, it was recognised by the census, it was categorised by the census, and the result will be published in the census results, in due course.
http://www.statistics.gov.uk/census2001/pdfs/se
If it walks like a duck, quacks like a duck and looks like a duck you may as well call it a duck.
Jedi was recognised in the recent UK census as a statically significant category.1 /pdfs/secti on5part3.pdf (Page 18)
http://www.statistics.gov.uk/census200
However what I found really interesting was some of the other choices in the ~150 different categories including:
Scientology
Nearly 100 different versions of Christianity.
Heathen, Atheist, Agnostic, Realist, Idealist, Rationalist, Humanist, Secularist.
The ISOC proposal didn't pass the smell test.
And Paul Dixie does ?
He is on a self confessed power grab and frankly the guy has VERY scarey ideals. Adopting the lesser of two evils is not a choice I'm prepared to support.
We keep pondering flicking the power switch on the core switch one day, just to see how much people suddenly realise their IT network means to them.. I'd give it about 1 minute before we got hassle from senior management asking when the network was due back up.
Make it a pre-planned outage during working hours for essential mainternance, it makes your point but reinforces it with a view that you are also pro-active.
What you really need is generics (as in C++ templates). Java collections are vile, since they suffer from type loss even when used with "real" objects. I'm surprised that didn't come into this top ten; it's a major language deficiency.
I should have predicted this! What is it about generics advocates ? You never quit harping on about this even though generics have been repeatedly rejected by the JCP.
Java needs Generics like a People need holes in their heads. They are pointless, cannot be added without badley breaking the VM, they add nothing except complexity; produce code bloat, break type safety and are hated by the real OO experts, because they are a crutch for people who do not understand polymorphism.
I'm really forced to wonder about the motivation of people who want to so badly break Java.
They [RIAA/MPAA] are using copyright as an argument to introduce Berman's law. However they don't need to prove anything; it gives them a blanket immunity.
Having a good 'motivation' is no defence against breaking the law, indeed it would make the prosecution easier because one of the three pillars (means, motive & oppportunity) of a successful prosecution is handed over on a plate.
Indeed, this would also be illegal in the UK under Section 1 of the 'The Computer Misuse Act 1990' ;
0 01 8_en_1.htm
(1) A person is guilty of an offence if--
(a) he causes a computer to perform any function with intent to secure access to any program or data held in any computer;
(b) the access he intends to secure is unauthorised; and
(c) he knows at the time when he causes the computer to perform the function that that is the case.
(2) The intent a person has to have to commit an offence under this section need not be directed at--
(a) any particular program or data;
(b) a program or data of any particular kind; or
(c) a program or data held in any particular computer.
(3) A person guilty of an offence under this section shall be liable on summary conviction to imprisonment for a term not exceeding six months or to a fine not exceeding level 5 on the standard scale or to both.
http://www.hmso.gov.uk/acts/acts1990/Ukpga_1990
As for the possibility of Tony Blair (UK Prime-Minister), some how excusing this, that is not likely. There is plenty of separation between the UK Judiciary and Politicians. UK Judges are not elected but appointed and once appointed are nearly impossible to remove. UK Judges also seem to regularly take delight in giving politicians the finger, when the latter attempt to step on their toes. i.e. http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/2162940.stm
I'm sure the outrage helped to speed things alone, however reading between the lines, putting my ear to the rumours mill has it that Felton serious overstepped the mark, went against policy and is lucky to still have a job.
Um, Microsoft rules eh; if that's not ms-troll I don't know what is...
However you are missing the point; setting aside it should have been implemented as assert and not Assert, it was the none standard behaviour in what was supposed to be an ANSI compliant C++ that is the real issue. So yes, that behaviour is none standard, and since practically every C++ programmer I know, who used VC++ including some world class acts and apparently plenty of slashdotters, fell for it. It is the Microsoft convention that was/is wrong, it is counter intuitive, so yes it was/is YAMB (Yet Another Microsoft Bug). The MASM segmentation alignment issue is the another example of the same attitude.
We are always right and that is the way it works,
that is the way it works, so you are wrong,
if you are wrong, we are right;
we are always right. ad nausium..
So that is why when Microsoft break a convention or standard and the fault is everybody elses.
Well frankly you need to grow up and down scale your ego, think freely instead engaging in group think and start listerning to others. Don't you know the customer is always right. So if we raise something, you should appologise for wasting my time, thank me for the contribution, and don't under any circumstance imply I'm stupid simply because my opinion differs. That really pisses me off about Microsoft consultants ops I mean 'evangelists'. I wonder what prat though it a good idea to send out 'evangelists' to preach 'belief' to 'Engineers'?
The best laugh I ever got at an evangelists expense was telling him that nature provided him one mouth and two ears and perhaps he should use them in that ratio and then he may understand our requirements. Did he shut up ? Well for about 3 seconds, before launching into his spiel.
So yes, none standard behaviour is YAMB (Yet Another Microsoft Bug), it is not RTFM.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/entertainment/film/2
It also starting to Look like Valenti has been forced to back down.
http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/6/26402.ht
Now they are on the run do NOT take this as victory and relax. I advocate moving onto the attack and pressing home the advantage. Tell your friends 'Look what they tried to do', tell them the MPAA/RIAA et. al. need to be watched they are trying to steal your rights, If we Geeks where not on the ball they may have suceeded. They still could. In short, rope likely future allies into the victory.
http://www1.excite.com/home/technology/tech_art
Not likely, I and my kit live in the UK, So ...
I'd report them to the Police under Section 1 of the Computer Misuse Act 1990.
The police would collect all the evidence under criminal law, for me.
The UK/US has a extradition treaty, so the 'Consultants' would spend upto 6 years in Jail for each attack/Offence.
The Management that ordered the attack would spend upto 12 years in Jail for count of conspiracy.
I sue them under civil law and gain a default judgement, because they've already been convicted under the heavier burden of criminal law.
I would claim for punitive damages since the damage was wilful.
I would then gain an Anton Pillon Order and cease assets cash/takings from their Cinemas and Stores.
Trust/Karma should be open ended and climb with diminishing returns making it more difficult to whore.
I trust the bank to meet my cheques, I don't trust it to keep my privacy. I may trust a usenet poster to paraphase articles accuratly, but not his judgement in drawing conclusions. I may trust a poster to debunk UFO myths, but not his Politics. Therefore, Trust/Karma should against a set of seperate attributes/objectives.
but the editorializer has clearly overstated the scope and effect of this bill. This seems to be a common tactic of those who rabidly defend an anti-copyright position with regards to modern file sharing.
So what ? you know it, I know, the poster knows it.
What you are forgetting is that Geeks are mirroring a 'common tactic' because it WORKS, we've been taught that lesson by some of the best practitioners of the FUD in the world.
The real question is why YOU oppose any effective technique?
Competence or excellence is not intrinsic to any nationality. As somebody who considers himself an elite geek I feel significant more affinity to a skilled 'foreigner' than to a mediocre or incompetent of my own nationality/race. Indeed in the past I've recruited Indian contractors to work on my team. They show the same spread as British engineers some are inept, the majority are competent, some are good or great.
In the past I've been offered better paid positions in London and the US with H1B however I declined, the work was boring. I'm motivated by doing interesting/challenging work. I don't want to spend all day doing CRUD, I find it boring and unmotivating. That is why I work on this project (www.kitv.co.uk). AIH earn 30K UKP (~45K USD/EUR), a good salary for a UK provincial Software Engineer, enough to keep me supplied with toys. However that is dwarfed by what I could earn in the London or the USA.
It appears to me that many US IT professional have priced themselves out of the market, it's a economics 101 issue. I'm forced to wonder what motivated these individuals complaining about the H1B issue to be IT Professionals in the first place. It sounds financial to me, the people that respond, "it's a good career/money/opportunity" to the question "why did you choose computing ?" and not "I like to hack/play/mess with computers". They have no a passion for the subject, no geeky-ness, and as a result will only ever be mediocre, at best. In my mind that is the give away clue, they are complaining about their own limitations.
If you believe this is fraud and/or computer crime committed by a UK individual or company you can report it here:
http://www.nationalcrimesquad.police.uk/nhtuc/n
Blunkett is bloody scary
:)
Though I'm starting to see a pattern.
Blunket talks tough on crime and makes draconian suggestion.
Massive outburst and public commotion.
Blunket backs down.
Tony says don't worry.
Public Perception: Blunket is tough on crime, whilst actually being pretty liberal. i.e. dope.
Um, actually I like his style
And according to this week's New Scientist are still producing 'new science'.
Apparently they are slowing down relative to the sun, due to the action of some unknown force, which may be linked to dark matter.
Synopsis here:
http://www.newscientist.com/news/search/dosearc
Though you'll have to buy an issue or wait a week to view the full text.
DTV tivo style is more like 1.5 Mbps.
That is very low bit rate for real-time encoded video stream, what is the encoding standard (MPEG2) ? What is the quality like?
We use industrial strength encoders from Tandberg, pretty much the best money can buy and we achieve an acceptable quality of video at 3Mbps real-time and 1.5Mbps off-line encoding
TIVO must be pretty poor picture quality and generate a lot of artefacts at 1.5Mbps realtime.
looks like a VOD product
The only real diference between VOD and PVR is that PVR encodes a source in real time.
That is the distance from the POP usually an exchange, the actual coverage is a trade secret but it is a *lot more* than a niche market. We can reach the rest though active street cabinet.
The storage requirements are *less* for a server side solution only one copy and reference count is needed even if million's of consumers record a program. On a client side PVR a million copies are stored it is massively less efficient.
Yes, the KIT service is much more than just PVR, DTV+EPG is the core, VOD, Internet Access and a range of localised Web-Services, Pizza Deliver, Local Government, Health Services are all included.