It brings to mind Need For Speed, Porsche Unleashed
But in "Need For Speed" you couldn't do a drive-by on a rival bootlegger's speakeasy front with tommy guns at 50mph (it goes so fast because 1930's mobsters can afford blazing-fast hotrods).
I submit that slow cars can be made fun with automatic weapons! But really, what can't be made more fun with automatic weapons, now that is the question.
If they're forced to actually hire people to review all these images, then that is a victory. It makes it that much harder for anyone to get into the spamming business, since they would have to have the money to hire all of those people. It represents another barrier to entry, and the more barriers there are, the less spammers we will have overall.
You're neglecting to consider that you're not just paying for the box, and the hole, but the ground the hole itself is in. Basically, you're paying the money to insure that the land isn't used for something else by buying it yourself. That land could be used for all sorts of profitable ventures, such as vegetable farming or the construction of rental properties. You have to offer them enough money to make selling you the land more profitable than any of the alternatives.
Luckily, if you and several thousand others each pay $2,000, you can have a very large graveyard indeed!
Yeah, we should probably stop short of hanging them, this shouldn't be a capital offense. It sets a dangerous precedent -- it reminds me of the sort of things Stalin did in the USSR.
Assuming someone could trick me into running a malicious executable. It's usually pretty obvious -- like those "porn videos" on yahoo vid. search that link you to a site that's all like, "error! you must download this blah thing to see nekkid ladies!"
Being able to distinguish an executable from a family vacation photo or tax spreadsheet is what separates the users from the lusers.
Yeah, my free copy of Avast! antivirus (home edition for non-commercial use) notifies me when I click on something malicious, and gives me a chance to opt out of downloading it. Additionally, Spybot Search & Destroy's "TeaTimer" prompts me before any application attempts to edit the registry (which shady websites love to do). On top of all that, Firefox is my default browser, and most ActiveX controls are disabled or prompt-to-download by default (as they should be).
I don't know if he has a childish view of addiction -- he's just aggro'd because the guy said that a crack addiction would cost less than World of Warcraft. Which is, obviously, complete hyperbole. But still.
Water evaporates as it is used and returns to its reservoir in the form of rain. The supply is theoretically infinite. However, oil is consumed when it is used, and parts of it stay in the atmosphere, creating the harmful greenhouse effect.
Aside from the fact that water is fundamentally different from oil, you haven't analyzed the size of the oil reserves whatsoever. How do you know that comparing this oil reserve to that oil reserve is the same as comparing a swimming pool to the ocean? Is that exactly how large they are relative to one another? What if using the oil was more like sipping out of a tall glass as opposed to a plastic dixie cup? Then, even if we could only "suck" so much, we'd still exhaust the reserve quickly.
In summary, you're ironically idiotic. Just because you're sucking a liquid through something "hundreds of times" does not make that "a legitimate scientific experiment." It has nothing to do with the issue at all, you're just running your mouth like a backwater yokel.
Congress wastes our tax dollars by going to war. That seems like a pretty easy shot, but, it's true. It'd make more sense to invest the money in math & science education here so that we retained more of our tech jobs, and could then hire all of those people we would have killed to work low-paying, labor-intensive jobs in our super mega factory factories that they know nothing about.
When you consider that as an alternative, doesn't paying $90 billion dollars to kill them now seem like a waste?
Of course, most people are wasteful, when you consider their actions in terms of opportunity cost.
First off, receptionists don't get paid $75,000/year. Most police officers don't even get paid that much.
Second, this is obviously not a system worth implementing unless there are serious security concerns -- it might make sense to install a system like this in a nuclear missile silo, but it wouldn't make sense at the courthouse. To imply that such a system is unreasonable because it would cost too much to install at every government facility in existence is just fishing for a problem that isn't there -- only an idiot would do that.
Third, a receptionist is the only reliable facial-recognition system on the market today. If secure areas like nuclear missile silos don't already have a receptionist who inspects everyone entering the area, then bypassing the area's security is as simple as stealing someone's mag-stripe badge. If you really think that single-factor authentication is secure, you need to wake up. We need double-factor, and when we're talking about things as dangerous as nuclear missiles, quadruple-factor authentication is not unreasonable.
Fourth, the receptionists do not have to be cleared to access the same quality of information as everyone else. The receptionists don't even have to know what is beyond the door that they protect.
Finally, the facility should already have IT support. Additionally, two computers is not a huge expense, and a software architect should be a one-time expense (assuming he does his job correctly).
Simple, leave the tag with a receptionist at the entrance to the "highly sensitive secure area," who also has a file of all the employees (with their names and photos) on her computer. Heck, if you wanted to get really fancy, you could make them enter a PIN code and scan their handprint as well in order to receive their tag from the receptionist.
You thought of a problem, but didn't consider the solution, and therefore didn't realize how simple it was.
Right. All of the evils in the world will be alleviated if we simply do away with currency and operate as a barter economy.
Don't you get it? People aren't greedy for money, they're greedy for the material possessions they can acquire with money, and getting rid of money won't get rid of that greed. You'll have the same problems you had before, along with some new ones, because you acted like an idiot and dismantled the system that allows us to specialize. You know, so some of us can have jobs besides just rustlin' steers and tillin' fields?
They're also completely out of their league when their detractors can now commit any variety of abusive acts, and get the church blamed for them. The church's reputation is so bad, that people are more willing to believe that the church attacked epileptics than they are willing to believe that Anonymous did! And this is the group that Fox "news" called "Hackers on steroids".
Slashdot Mirror
GTA is still the finest sandbox-game series
Civilization 4, Fallout or The Elder Scrolls are better candidates for the "finest sandbox-game series" than GTA will ever be.
Not that GTA doesn't fill it's own little crime-and-mayhem niche or won't be fun or anything.
It brings to mind Need For Speed, Porsche Unleashed
But in "Need For Speed" you couldn't do a drive-by on a rival bootlegger's speakeasy front with tommy guns at 50mph (it goes so fast because 1930's mobsters can afford blazing-fast hotrods).
I submit that slow cars can be made fun with automatic weapons! But really, what can't be made more fun with automatic weapons, now that is the question.
If they're forced to actually hire people to review all these images, then that is a victory. It makes it that much harder for anyone to get into the spamming business, since they would have to have the money to hire all of those people. It represents another barrier to entry, and the more barriers there are, the less spammers we will have overall.
You're neglecting to consider that you're not just paying for the box, and the hole, but the ground the hole itself is in. Basically, you're paying the money to insure that the land isn't used for something else by buying it yourself. That land could be used for all sorts of profitable ventures, such as vegetable farming or the construction of rental properties. You have to offer them enough money to make selling you the land more profitable than any of the alternatives.
Luckily, if you and several thousand others each pay $2,000, you can have a very large graveyard indeed!
Funny, I got one with a subject line reading "Attention! Chi/d Pomo!"
So, would you explain how violating net neutrality is child "endargement?"
Is there any issue about which you people will not leap up and scream "think of the children!?"
Yeah, we should probably stop short of hanging them, this shouldn't be a capital offense. It sets a dangerous precedent -- it reminds me of the sort of things Stalin did in the USSR.
Assuming someone could trick me into running a malicious executable. It's usually pretty obvious -- like those "porn videos" on yahoo vid. search that link you to a site that's all like, "error! you must download this blah thing to see nekkid ladies!"
Being able to distinguish an executable from a family vacation photo or tax spreadsheet is what separates the users from the lusers.
Yeah, my free copy of Avast! antivirus (home edition for non-commercial use) notifies me when I click on something malicious, and gives me a chance to opt out of downloading it. Additionally, Spybot Search & Destroy's "TeaTimer" prompts me before any application attempts to edit the registry (which shady websites love to do). On top of all that, Firefox is my default browser, and most ActiveX controls are disabled or prompt-to-download by default (as they should be).
No, I am not a shill.
I don't know if he has a childish view of addiction -- he's just aggro'd because the guy said that a crack addiction would cost less than World of Warcraft. Which is, obviously, complete hyperbole. But still.
Water evaporates as it is used and returns to its reservoir in the form of rain. The supply is theoretically infinite. However, oil is consumed when it is used, and parts of it stay in the atmosphere, creating the harmful greenhouse effect.
Aside from the fact that water is fundamentally different from oil, you haven't analyzed the size of the oil reserves whatsoever. How do you know that comparing this oil reserve to that oil reserve is the same as comparing a swimming pool to the ocean? Is that exactly how large they are relative to one another? What if using the oil was more like sipping out of a tall glass as opposed to a plastic dixie cup? Then, even if we could only "suck" so much, we'd still exhaust the reserve quickly.
In summary, you're ironically idiotic. Just because you're sucking a liquid through something "hundreds of times" does not make that "a legitimate scientific experiment." It has nothing to do with the issue at all, you're just running your mouth like a backwater yokel.
You're an idiot if you think your anecdote involving bodies of water and straws has anything to do with the issue at hand.
Just to make sure that this is a legitimate scientific experiment, repeat it a hundred times, and see if you get the same results.
If repetition is all you think that an experiment needs to be "scientific", you've got a long way to go.
This is not funny. Do not mod me funny.
God, if only I had mod points, I would mod you "funny."
Congress wastes our tax dollars by going to war. That seems like a pretty easy shot, but, it's true. It'd make more sense to invest the money in math & science education here so that we retained more of our tech jobs, and could then hire all of those people we would have killed to work low-paying, labor-intensive jobs in our super mega factory factories that they know nothing about.
When you consider that as an alternative, doesn't paying $90 billion dollars to kill them now seem like a waste?
Of course, most people are wasteful, when you consider their actions in terms of opportunity cost.
First off, receptionists don't get paid $75,000/year. Most police officers don't even get paid that much.
Second, this is obviously not a system worth implementing unless there are serious security concerns -- it might make sense to install a system like this in a nuclear missile silo, but it wouldn't make sense at the courthouse. To imply that such a system is unreasonable because it would cost too much to install at every government facility in existence is just fishing for a problem that isn't there -- only an idiot would do that.
Third, a receptionist is the only reliable facial-recognition system on the market today. If secure areas like nuclear missile silos don't already have a receptionist who inspects everyone entering the area, then bypassing the area's security is as simple as stealing someone's mag-stripe badge. If you really think that single-factor authentication is secure, you need to wake up. We need double-factor, and when we're talking about things as dangerous as nuclear missiles, quadruple-factor authentication is not unreasonable.
Fourth, the receptionists do not have to be cleared to access the same quality of information as everyone else. The receptionists don't even have to know what is beyond the door that they protect.
Finally, the facility should already have IT support. Additionally, two computers is not a huge expense, and a software architect should be a one-time expense (assuming he does his job correctly).
There is no such thing as the "right to privacy", per se
Go look up the landmark case "Katz v. United States 389 U.S. 347 (1967)" and tell me if you still feel that way.
Simple, leave the tag with a receptionist at the entrance to the "highly sensitive secure area," who also has a file of all the employees (with their names and photos) on her computer. Heck, if you wanted to get really fancy, you could make them enter a PIN code and scan their handprint as well in order to receive their tag from the receptionist.
You thought of a problem, but didn't consider the solution, and therefore didn't realize how simple it was.
I am not a troll. I dare you to go to 4chan.org, go to /b/, and surf for any length of time without seeing jokes that include racial slurs.
Bean counters.
The RIAA must prove that she not only made the files public but also announced to some 3rd party that they can take them.
My "shared" directory is entitled "Private_Property_Dont_Download"
I'd love to see them take me on in court.
Don't think for a minute that any of mankind's greatest inventions were created for any reasons other than greed.
Right. All of the evils in the world will be alleviated if we simply do away with currency and operate as a barter economy.
Don't you get it? People aren't greedy for money, they're greedy for the material possessions they can acquire with money, and getting rid of money won't get rid of that greed. You'll have the same problems you had before, along with some new ones, because you acted like an idiot and dismantled the system that allows us to specialize. You know, so some of us can have jobs besides just rustlin' steers and tillin' fields?
They're also completely out of their league when their detractors can now commit any variety of abusive acts, and get the church blamed for them. The church's reputation is so bad, that people are more willing to believe that the church attacked epileptics than they are willing to believe that Anonymous did! And this is the group that Fox "news" called "Hackers on steroids".