I heard a wildly apocryphal story once that claimed at least one IT company had developed a phone tree system that automatically directed you to a real person if you swore. You may be very much on to something!
I hate to be blunt with you, because ZFS is totally awesome, but you're addressing problems unrelated to the WinFS poster's agenda. The whole point of WinFS was to give home users a new metaphor for interacting with a filesystem so that it was easier to navigate, organise, and think about; the mechanics of ZFS don't really provide that.
You may, then, be horrified to discover that Das Keyboard is a revised version of the Model M, and your co-worker probably cherishes it for the same reasons Das Keyboard was created.
"Unless you're Fatal1ty, you probably don't care too much about shaving 100 ms off your reaction times, and you probably have plenty of fun with your mouse and keyboard, gamepad, or Wii-mote already."
I hate to break it to this guy, but 100 ms is a very, very long time in most FPS games!
The article suggests that the James Webb Space Telescope will be launched from the Space Shuttle, and somehow make it out to 1.5 million kilometres from the Earth. Wikipedia likes to note that an Ariane 5 rocket will be used instead. This is a surprisingly flawed story!
No. Universe more-or-less means "one verse" in Latin, as in "the whole thing in one verse." Universals in Idealist philosophy were things that were always present, regardless of where you went, and applicable to everything that was material. You are using a back-formation created by someone who does not know their language history because they wanted to sound more ominous than "universe."
Although the word "universe" is now accepted to mean "the membrane of space that was created by the Big Bang," this is etymologically inaccurate. Outside of playful uses (such as "off in one's own universe" or a TV serial's universe) the word "universe" should be synonymous with "absolutely everything ever," and we ought to come up with some intermediary term (like "brane" if you feel like you require more than ten dimensions in order to explain quantum phenomena) to refer to this nice big bubble of matter-energy we've found ourselves encapsulated in.
Good show about the microwave radiation, though. Now, let's hope that there isn't a film of Angels & Demons that is conveniently timed or anything.
Touching and gestures shouldn't be focused on so much--that technology is already perfect in the hands of Apple, Microsoft, and the university research that preceded them. I think what's really important is that we now have a video screen that is capable of displaying 3D images without any glasses used, like those old museum displays that had to be etched with lasers in obscure materials. (I think I saw a beaver once that accomplished this same effect.) Bugs or even vapourware in touch stuff are totally acceptable because that's not what's cool about the invention.
Where does one submit resumes for becoming a Dot-com distaster? I find dot-coms to be extremely distasteful and I would like to share my experiences on the matter.
...it has been posted on the front page of Slashdot, every future worm author will code their stuff to spread more slowly, so that the increase in scan rate is negligible. Hooray for self-obsoleting discoveries!
(Don't get me wrong, I'm a huge proponent of publicly posting computer security information. But this seems pretty easy to circumvent when considered, no?)
That XMLterm.org page looks kind of evil. I think it may actually be a spam-blog that rips stuff from here. It's just a little bit hard to credit some of the stuff they link to as official Mozilla sites given their propensity to misspelling Firefox, and the fact that the download buttons are blank. Also, I strongly doubt that the people who wrote XMLterm were peddling some of the crap that blog links to. Alas, it may be more dead than you think.
I rather agree. All it really says for "why the brain interprets them as it does" is, as another poster mentioned, "context". I think that link would be better suited to idle.slashdot.org.
The larger and more public-sector the entity, the more expensive things get; doubly so if the entity in question is a national government in North America. Yes, the laptops would have cost $1000 each to private citizens, but they would have cost an insurance company $2000 for the exact same product and the US government $3000. Apparently, selling to the government puts emotional hardship on vendors such that they are compelled to quietly scam as much money out of those agencies as possible; I've been told this happens with things as diverse as building renovations and wheelchairs as well. There is no concrete basis for such a price hike, of course, but, you know, with the US being a free country and all... why not?
Actually, it does that to bypass DRM, which is significantly less innocuous in the face of legislation like the DMCA. This was mentioned the last time Glider came up on Slashdot.
I, for one, would gladly call that problem "how long it takes a Java plug-in to load, and how unstable they are in Mozilla browsers." The Xetris sample posted elsewhere in these comments runs very quickly and with very little CPU usage, something which I cannot ever remember receiving from a browser plug-in from sun.java.com. In a similar stroke, I imagine it's probably nice in thin-client situations where the client machine doesn't have the system resources for a full JVM, also.
I hate to troll on your parade, but the existence of Mono seems pretty token at times, as if it were allowed to live only as a way to trick Linux folks into believing that C# isn't going to lock them inside of Gates' magic glass box, which MS would have no fear of revoking via lawsuits if their almighty patentpocalypse against Linux came to be (and wasn't just FUD, fate of Novell notwithstanding.) How sturdy/complete *is* Mono? How much does stuff have to be reworked in order to fly on it?
See, 'cause, if it's not 100% compatible, everyone can gawk in horror at how many languages Microsoft has squeezed onto the top 10, and just how firmly entrenched they are in the souls of programmers. (That being said, yay for Python and PHP for combating them.)
While probably rather nasty and nanny-statish of them to do so, I can't help but think that this will force at least some people using certain archaic standards-non-complaint browsers to use better ones, or at least heavily-patched copies of IE 6 (although, since Microsoft is big on IE 7, they might skip that entirely.) Who knows, it might improve standards compliance a little bit—at least as far as transparent PNGs are concerned. (Obviously, this does not count Safari.)
First: Anonymous is not protesting the beliefs of Scientology. Anonymous is protesting their actions, and the amount of money they make off of their religious stuff. For these reason, Scientology is often classified as akin to pyramid scheme or something similar (obviously not an actual pyramid scheme) rather than a cult. Most so-called cults tend focus their effort on enslaving their followers to perform menial labour rather than spending time farming their members' current sources of income.
Second: The technical, traditional meaning of "cult" strictly refers to the priests and priestesses of a god or goddess in a pantheon. Aphrodite had a cult, Isis had a cult, and, at one point, your friend and mine, Jesus had a cult (he had about three hundred followers on a commune at one point, if I recall.) By contrast, a religion may include more than one god and encompasses those who simply believe as well. The media term "cult" generally refers to what academics call a "dangerous NRM" (new religious movement). "Dangerous NRM" supports your statement that it is a real religion and not something fundamentally different, but it is important to note the "dangerous" part. Wicca is a non-dangerous NRM. Heaven's Gate is a dangerous NRM. The difference is best related through a number of techniques that dangerous NRMs frequently use:
Physical barriers or a social hierarchy which prevent leaving.
Financial dependence (and exploitation) of members.
Isolation (especially physical) from non-followers.
Sometimes, psychological control tactics, such as never allowing an individual member to be alone (where they might think for themselves and realise that This Is A Bad Idea) or hypnotic controls that encourage a trance-like state (physical exhaustion + certain rhythms = bad)
Another strong indicator of an NRM is the presence of a single, charismatic leader figure, like David Koresh or Jim Jones. (Both of whom eventually killed most of their followers, but were extremely well-respected by them. Jim Jones was even respected by main-stream Christian religion during his life time.) For this reason, and possible other reasons, Christianity actually satisfies both the traditional and modern definitions of "cult" (although whether that is a dangerous or non-dangerous NRM is another topic entirely.)
Slashdot Mirror
I heard a wildly apocryphal story once that claimed at least one IT company had developed a phone tree system that automatically directed you to a real person if you swore. You may be very much on to something!
I hate to be blunt with you, because ZFS is totally awesome, but you're addressing problems unrelated to the WinFS poster's agenda. The whole point of WinFS was to give home users a new metaphor for interacting with a filesystem so that it was easier to navigate, organise, and think about; the mechanics of ZFS don't really provide that.
You may, then, be horrified to discover that Das Keyboard is a revised version of the Model M, and your co-worker probably cherishes it for the same reasons Das Keyboard was created.
"Unless you're Fatal1ty, you probably don't care too much about shaving 100 ms off your reaction times, and you probably have plenty of fun with your mouse and keyboard, gamepad, or Wii-mote already."
I hate to break it to this guy, but 100 ms is a very, very long time in most FPS games!
The article suggests that the James Webb Space Telescope will be launched from the Space Shuttle, and somehow make it out to 1.5 million kilometres from the Earth. Wikipedia likes to note that an Ariane 5 rocket will be used instead. This is a surprisingly flawed story!
Why, getting activation keys for all of those nodes, of course.
No. Universe more-or-less means "one verse" in Latin, as in "the whole thing in one verse." Universals in Idealist philosophy were things that were always present, regardless of where you went, and applicable to everything that was material. You are using a back-formation created by someone who does not know their language history because they wanted to sound more ominous than "universe."
Although the word "universe" is now accepted to mean "the membrane of space that was created by the Big Bang," this is etymologically inaccurate. Outside of playful uses (such as "off in one's own universe" or a TV serial's universe) the word "universe" should be synonymous with "absolutely everything ever," and we ought to come up with some intermediary term (like "brane" if you feel like you require more than ten dimensions in order to explain quantum phenomena) to refer to this nice big bubble of matter-energy we've found ourselves encapsulated in.
Good show about the microwave radiation, though. Now, let's hope that there isn't a film of Angels & Demons that is conveniently timed or anything.
Touching and gestures shouldn't be focused on so much--that technology is already perfect in the hands of Apple, Microsoft, and the university research that preceded them. I think what's really important is that we now have a video screen that is capable of displaying 3D images without any glasses used, like those old museum displays that had to be etched with lasers in obscure materials. (I think I saw a beaver once that accomplished this same effect.) Bugs or even vapourware in touch stuff are totally acceptable because that's not what's cool about the invention.
Where does one submit resumes for becoming a Dot-com distaster? I find dot-coms to be extremely distasteful and I would like to share my experiences on the matter.
...it has been posted on the front page of Slashdot, every future worm author will code their stuff to spread more slowly, so that the increase in scan rate is negligible. Hooray for self-obsoleting discoveries!
(Don't get me wrong, I'm a huge proponent of publicly posting computer security information. But this seems pretty easy to circumvent when considered, no?)
That XMLterm.org page looks kind of evil. I think it may actually be a spam-blog that rips stuff from here. It's just a little bit hard to credit some of the stuff they link to as official Mozilla sites given their propensity to misspelling Firefox, and the fact that the download buttons are blank. Also, I strongly doubt that the people who wrote XMLterm were peddling some of the crap that blog links to. Alas, it may be more dead than you think.
I rather agree. All it really says for "why the brain interprets them as it does" is, as another poster mentioned, "context". I think that link would be better suited to idle.slashdot.org.
Bonus points if the PostScript puts it up on the wall for you.
Combining #4 and #5, I would propose that the "S" is 0x01.
The larger and more public-sector the entity, the more expensive things get; doubly so if the entity in question is a national government in North America. Yes, the laptops would have cost $1000 each to private citizens, but they would have cost an insurance company $2000 for the exact same product and the US government $3000. Apparently, selling to the government puts emotional hardship on vendors such that they are compelled to quietly scam as much money out of those agencies as possible; I've been told this happens with things as diverse as building renovations and wheelchairs as well. There is no concrete basis for such a price hike, of course, but, you know, with the US being a free country and all... why not?
Actually, it does that to bypass DRM, which is significantly less innocuous in the face of legislation like the DMCA. This was mentioned the last time Glider came up on Slashdot.
I, for one, would gladly call that problem "how long it takes a Java plug-in to load, and how unstable they are in Mozilla browsers." The Xetris sample posted elsewhere in these comments runs very quickly and with very little CPU usage, something which I cannot ever remember receiving from a browser plug-in from sun.java.com. In a similar stroke, I imagine it's probably nice in thin-client situations where the client machine doesn't have the system resources for a full JVM, also.
I hate to troll on your parade, but the existence of Mono seems pretty token at times, as if it were allowed to live only as a way to trick Linux folks into believing that C# isn't going to lock them inside of Gates' magic glass box, which MS would have no fear of revoking via lawsuits if their almighty patentpocalypse against Linux came to be (and wasn't just FUD, fate of Novell notwithstanding.) How sturdy/complete *is* Mono? How much does stuff have to be reworked in order to fly on it? See, 'cause, if it's not 100% compatible, everyone can gawk in horror at how many languages Microsoft has squeezed onto the top 10, and just how firmly entrenched they are in the souls of programmers. (That being said, yay for Python and PHP for combating them.)
While probably rather nasty and nanny-statish of them to do so, I can't help but think that this will force at least some people using certain archaic standards-non-complaint browsers to use better ones, or at least heavily-patched copies of IE 6 (although, since Microsoft is big on IE 7, they might skip that entirely.) Who knows, it might improve standards compliance a little bit—at least as far as transparent PNGs are concerned. (Obviously, this does not count Safari.)
Sounds like the story may need a "troll" tag!
The cost is "being a goddamn ten foot long reptile." The cure is "put it in pills." Sheesh, some transhumanists...
Second: The technical, traditional meaning of "cult" strictly refers to the priests and priestesses of a god or goddess in a pantheon. Aphrodite had a cult, Isis had a cult, and, at one point, your friend and mine, Jesus had a cult (he had about three hundred followers on a commune at one point, if I recall.) By contrast, a religion may include more than one god and encompasses those who simply believe as well. The media term "cult" generally refers to what academics call a "dangerous NRM" (new religious movement). "Dangerous NRM" supports your statement that it is a real religion and not something fundamentally different, but it is important to note the "dangerous" part. Wicca is a non-dangerous NRM. Heaven's Gate is a dangerous NRM. The difference is best related through a number of techniques that dangerous NRMs frequently use:
Another strong indicator of an NRM is the presence of a single, charismatic leader figure, like David Koresh or Jim Jones. (Both of whom eventually killed most of their followers, but were extremely well-respected by them. Jim Jones was even respected by main-stream Christian religion during his life time.) For this reason, and possible other reasons, Christianity actually satisfies both the traditional and modern definitions of "cult" (although whether that is a dangerous or non-dangerous NRM is another topic entirely.)
Books are great like that.
You... must be new here.
Why has there been no discussion on Slashdot of IE 8 beta 1?
Available here without any WGA crap.
(It gets 10/100, btw, and can't do Acid2 completely.)