|
Kent Sharkey wrote: .NET Dark Ages?
v1 was a nasssty plague. It should never have seen the light of day.
I still await the coming of the next great thing.
|
|
|
|
|
Bloomberg says that early staffers “had an unusual compensation system” that multiplied staffers salaries and bonuses based on the performance of the self-driving project. Yes, please
|
|
|
|
|
Theoretical physicists from ETH Zurich deliberately misled intelligent machines, and thus refined the process of machine learning. Oh sure - lie to them and irritate them. That will end well.
|
|
|
|
|
On February 13th, 2002, the first version of .NET was released as part of Visual Studio.NET. It seems just like yesterday when Microsoft was building its “Next Generation Windows Services” and unleashed a new level of productivity with Visual Studio.NET. The traditional gift for the 15th is Crystal, so maybe make a Report
Or don't - I wouldn't wish that beast on anyone.
|
|
|
|
|
Kent Sharkey wrote: The traditional gift for the 15th is Crystal, so maybe make a Report I thought it was meth.
/ravi
|
|
|
|
|
Well, I think I might be more likely to do crystal meth than Crystal Reports.
TTFN - Kent
|
|
|
|
|
Rumor has it one often resorts to crystal meth after programming Crystal Reports.
/ravi
|
|
|
|
|
TTFN - Kent
|
|
|
|
|
Golly, is it really so long ago that they produced a product that they named with a filename that's only legal on *NIX systems?
I thought they'd turned stupid at least three years later than that.
I wanna be a eunuchs developer! Pass me a bread knife!
|
|
|
|
|
Mark_Wallace wrote: I thought they'd turned stupid at least three years later than that. Who told you that they were not stupid from the very beginning?
M.D.V.
If something has a solution... Why do we have to worry about?. If it has no solution... For what reason do we have to worry about?
Help me to understand what I'm saying, and I'll explain it better to you
Rating helpful answers is nice, but saying thanks can be even nicer.
|
|
|
|
|
Hey, DOS was cool!
I wanna be a eunuchs developer! Pass me a bread knife!
|
|
|
|
|
Should the WWW be locked down with DRM? Tim Berners-Lee needs to decide, and soon. "Give it away, give it away, give it away now"
|
|
|
|
|
Yeah, Hollywood and musicians and developers are so afraid that people download their software... Meanwhile they're breaking record after record, most watched show, most bought game in the first hour, most visited cinema movie... They make millions, if not billions, but boohoo some people are still (illegally) downloading their products.
First of all, not every download is a missed sale, some people would never ever buy your product even if they could not download it for free.
Second, some downloads actually become sales! I've downloaded plenty of music back in the day (which was/is? legal in the Netherlands) that I later bought because I thought it was good. More people do this, we can't just go around and buy everything because there are hundreds of interesting releases each month!
Last, but certainly not least, imposing DRM upon honest folk only drives them to go and download illegal copies of your product. I've got a friggin' CD I cannot play anywhere else than in my stereo or computer. I wanted to listen to it in the car, but unfortunately my car couldn't play it because of some DRM protection. Had I known I never would've bought it! And what about those annoying commercials on DVD's and Blu-Rays, the ones you can't skip and pirated version don't have. Or the maximum number of installs or machines on a game!?
I've actually already ranted about these money hungry morons today[^] (two posts below), but this still pisses me off.
I hope everyone who thinks DRM (in most forms) is a good idea, and everyone representing copyright owners and coming to take your money (because that is all they're really after), step on a Lego
|
|
|
|
|
Agreed all (except I'd suggest a shattered lego).
The whole idea of a black-box "We'll sue anyone who opens it!" DRM module is completely intolerable, not because DRM is a bad thing per se, but because the people who want to make it a black box have proven themselves to be completely untrustworthy (DVDs with rootkits, anyone?)
The only reason I can see for their denying security firms the right to "look into the box" is because they don't want the firms seeing what they want to do to consumers.
For instance, you can bet your bottom groat that the things will be filled to the brim with "telemetry*" routines, which will be pretty much undetectable, because their activities can be shrouded by the flow of data to and from the browser.
Forget privacy altogether, if this thing goes through. Hollywood, sony, etc. will own you far worse than MS would ever try to -- and MS behaves like saints, compared to those greedy {insert appropriate plural or collective noun here}
With people like that, their only reason for hiding stuff is that they've got something to hide.
The sony rootkit will be less than the tip of the iceberg.
* The latest euphemism for "spyware".
I wanna be a eunuchs developer! Pass me a bread knife!
|
|
|
|
|
So, what's the best Israeli-made browser, these days?
I wanna be a eunuchs developer! Pass me a bread knife!
|
|
|
|
|
How do you avoid getting made obsolete by artificial intelligence in a time when resources and research are largely being funnelled toward improving that area of tech? By merging with the machines, according to Tesla CEO Elon Musk. Turn on, jack in, space out
|
|
|
|
|
I'd rather be obsolete in Elon's eyes than have an extra dependency that can fail. Merging would also mean adding some limitations on health-care - would you go into a giant magnetic scanner if your head contains a few chips?
An expert at selling the hype.
Bastard Programmer from Hell
If you can't read my code, try converting it here[^]
|
|
|
|
|
And Mr. Musk's brain-computer interface is...?
|
|
|
|
|
Somewhere south of his neckline, about where he pulled this idea.
TTFN - Kent
|
|
|
|
|
I wish he'd just focus his energies on making my jetpack.
I wanna be a eunuchs developer! Pass me a bread knife!
|
|
|
|
|
A bill to reform copyright law and give consumers the right to control their own devices is pending in Congress. Here's why you need to support it. IANAL
|
|
|
|
|
That's wrong... I own the hardware 100% and a copy of the software too (even if proprietary)...
The problem is not with the ownership, but with the lack of law that enforces the seller to take responsibility for the product they sell...
If you get a stinking block of butter you will be refunded, if you have a piece of malfunctioning software you can't get nowhere, mainly because of incompetent but greedy managers hiding behind lawyers lurking in the dark...
Skipper: We'll fix it.
Alex: Fix it? How you gonna fix this?
Skipper: Grit, spit and a whole lotta duct tape.
|
|
|
|
|
Kornfeld Eliyahu Peter wrote: I own the hardware 100% and a copy of the software too (even if proprietary)...
That's what it should be, but not always is.
In some countries you even pay a % as fee in hardware like CDs, USB Sticks or external drives just because you could use it to storage a piracy copy of whatever...
Copyright is a very controversial and often unfair theme.
M.D.V.
If something has a solution... Why do we have to worry about?. If it has no solution... For what reason do we have to worry about?
Help me to understand what I'm saying, and I'll explain it better to you
Rating helpful answers is nice, but saying thanks can be even nicer.
|
|
|
|
|
Name and shame 'em: Italy!
* CALL APOGEE, SAY AARDWOLF
* GCS d--- s-/++ a- C++++ U+++ P- L- E-- W++ N++ o+ K- w+++ O? M-- V? PS+ PE- Y+ PGP t++ 5? X R++ tv-- b+ DI+++ D++ G e++>+++ h--- ++>+++ y+++* Weapons extension: ma- k++ F+2 X
* Never pay more than 20 bucks for a computer game.
* I'm a puny punmaker.
|
|
|
|
|
I think copyright is a fair principle at its core.
However, buying a legit movie and having to sit through ten minutes of anti-piracy ads, or buying a game only to be limited by x account and/or y computers, or having to pay money for people who listen to their own music at work, and, indeed, having to pay tax on CDs and USBs because, heaven forbid, you may put a (digital) copy of your own bought music on it... That really pisses me off!
In the Netherlands and Belgium we have BUMA/STEMRA and BAF/BREIN who enforce these copyright laws and I hope they all die in a fire!
These money wolves are worse than politicians.
The original authors of the music, movies and software only get a fraction of the money and only if they have a membership (although they don't look at membership while persecuting individuals for using copyrighted material, because that would cost them money).
I recently posted a song from a bands official YouTube in the Lounge only to find out it was blocked in Germany by the very company that "protects" these bands!
Not a single good word will be wasted on these cretins
|
|
|
|