Posts by Oninoshiko 1937 publicly visible posts • joined 6 Oct 2008
All UNIX derivatives, including Linux, have had "remote management" capabilities for a decade before even DOS existed!
Point of order:
Linux didn't exist until a decade AFTER the first release of DOS. DOS was 1981, Linux didn't exist until 1991.
You're also getting a little overzealous with the word "pirated" there. As far as I can tell, Microsoft has always complied with the BSD license, and even if they were not, they had a fully paid license of SysV for Xenix.
assuming we're talking a current version of it, and not CryEngine 1.0, natch...well, that's me tempting fate eh?
I almost made that comment my self, but reading their site, it looks like they are talking about CryEngine(4). The newest iteration of the CryEngine has been announce to not have a number (I wish Crytek hadn't done that, it's confusing). Which is why it didn't have one.
It's not likely we are talking about old games, but new ones (maybe re-releases). New games are more important then old ones for gaming-on-Linux anyway. The Humble Bundle guys have proven that Linux users are willing to pay for games, even more then MacOS and Windows users. We now have both CryEngine, Unreal Engine, and Unity are all able to work on Linux. I'm not going to call it the year of gaming on Linux, but there is a lot of hedging going on in the industry.
This is not civil rights law, this is constitutional law. To quote the unanimous opinion (which you obviously did not bother to look up (seriously, it isn't that long of a read)):
"We hold that the immunity from state scrutiny of membership lists which the Association claims on behalf of its members is here so related to the right of the members to pursue their lawful private interests privately and to associate freely with others in so doing as to come within the protection of the Fourteenth Amendment. And we conclude that Alabama has fallen short of showing a controlling justification for the deterrent effect on the free enjoyment of the right to associate which disclosure of membership lists is likely to have. Accordingly, the judgment of civil contempt and the $100,000 fine which resulted from petitioner's refusal to comply with the production order in this respect must fall."
The entire purpose of wearing a skirt is to show off as much of your legs as you possibly can while just barely keeping your underwear covered.
Umm.. what?
There are a range of lengths of skirts covering from almost nothing to all the way down to the ankles. Some even drag on the ground behind the wearer.
Except of course that for most of us bandwidth is no longer a problem. Bit late coming this one, like a decade.
Exactly what are you doing on this site? It's quite obvious you do not work in IT, because then you'd realize that it does matter from the point of view of the ISP and the server operators.
sound is what got me, I run ad block solely for that. I do NOT want web page in a background tab making noise all the sudden at work. I feel kind of bad for it, but if networks won't limit themselves to reasonable ads, what else can I do?
Personally I always liked the project wonderful ads from a couple of web-comics I have been known to read. They are unobtrusive, and pay for the time they are on the the site, not per click.
All that said, considering Trevor_Potts response above, I'd kinda like to see his response to the Ars Technica "experiment."
Lifting 50 tonnes is great, the problem is dropping it off (this was addressed in the fine story). If you lose 50 tonnes you become vary buoyant, and have a hard time landing again. Either you vent off your vary expensive He, or you take on ballast. about the best ballast source would be a river, but if you have a river, that you can easily pull 50 tonnes of water out of, why don't you just ship by boat?
There might be a few places where you need to take vary heavy things, have no better means of transport, and happen to have ballast at the location, but they are not common enough to fund a healthy industry.
I'm also not confident in the demand for a slow passenger service. It sounds nice, but is there enough demand?
So if the right sequence of events maybe just so happened you might be able to kill someone. Maybe. Assuming there are no physical safeties, something we've known to do since the Therac-25 problems.
Know what happened the last time my electricity was out? I sat in the dark (actually, I was at work, the non-networked generator turned on like nothing happened. Just like it does at every hospital)
Know what happened the last time I didn't have running water? we got bottled water.
Know what happened the last time the traffic lights where out? everyone treated them as stop-signs.
All of these things have happen where I live in recent memory. Keep calm and carry on.
Now compare that with shoving a 7.62×39mm round through someone's chest at 640m/s.
Except it's not a protest, they two aren't even remotely comparable. When one has a sit-in, they normally have signs or shirts or someone telling bystanderds what it was about.
This doesn't have any of that. If you want to protest then protest. Go to:
4111 E 37th St. North
Witchita, KS
and start sitting. That is a protest, a DDoS is not, because it doesn't raise any kind of awareness of anything.
I rather concur with you, I think the primary objection was the presumption and lies.
I think the public bitchslap and give them the opportunity for them to back down is just good business sense. No need to involve a lawyer if you don't have to. Also, he doesn't have a reason to much care if it's quiet or not.
Because it wasn't a parody.
It also isn't transformitive, and is a substantial taking of content. This makes it unlikely that it would be fair use.
Combined with the filmaker already demonstrating bad faith by implying he had received permission, it's unlikely a judge would back it, and Notch has the resources to take it to court on principle (and frankly, I get the impression he would).
It has $1.6bn invested in the fruity firm compared to Icahn's $3.6bn and would like to see a more long term approach.
We don't think Carl Icahn, who's a relatively small investor
If these numbers are correct, he's alone a bigger investor then CalPERS. What do they make of their own investment, I wonder. Pocket-change?
"you mean 0.529 percent."
No. Per cent, i,e, "per 100".
It's Latin. You know, that language that has been around for a few thousand years.
If a Johnny-come-lately, the US of A, wants to name its coins after a number, they deserve any confusion that arises. Even the US patent system would stop short of such nonsense.
Latin would be "per centum" not "per cent"
"Games on list of Old-school-hard-games is too old-school-hard!" Seriously guys? You are really going there?
If you don't like games like this just don't play them. Honestly, there is only one on this list I'm really interested in trying, but there's no reason to complain about the rest. From reports they are some people's thing.
Just consider yourself lucky that you have this fine review to warn you off (or get you interested, if you are a masochist)
it is against medical ethics to threaten sanctions on patients; alcoholics are addicts and rarely able to control their behaviour.
Not only is it NOT unethical to choose who gets the limited number of organs based on who is most likely to benefit most from it, due to the limited number of organs available, it's unethical NOT to. It's not a threat of sanctions, it's a matter of allocating a limited resource where it can do the most good.
Don't forget the shareholders, either
I totally despise Apple, and if they went into receivership tomorrow I would probably be in the hospital after a very intense drunken celebration, but the one thing I hate more is misinformation. AAPL pays a quarterly dividend. Last quarter that was 3.05 USD/share (yielding 2.26%). At 892.6M shares outstanding, that's about 2.7 billion USD last quarter.
You can argue if that's enough or not, but they do give it.
I can't say anything about next quarter, but apple's profits dropped between Q4 2012 and Q4 2013.
Also, their profit is inline with samsung's but not as diversified (Sammy sells, TVs, SSDs, Fridges... too much to count, plus the components used to make many of these (NAND Flash, LCD elements, OLED elements), many of which Apple buys). Samsung contenues to diversify their product line too.
I'll leave figuring which is the higher risk as an exercise to the reader.
(buying Sammy stock is an interesting matter though)
Samsung isn't traded on any US markets.
The last transaction of Sammy stock my broker knows about was four days ago. Being profitable but taking a stock-price hit, I was interested in maybe picking some up.
Not as easy a task as I'd thought it would be.
The Register 
Biting the hand that feeds IT
Copyright. All rights reserved © 1998–2024
