Yes, of course, because everyone knows that when you reimplement someones API (Application Programming Interface) you code the internals exactly the same, including bugs!
The parent isn't insightful, it's a troll, do the mods that modded the parent even know what an API is?
An API is used to provide a generic programming interface so that the implementation is irrelevant to the the application.
If you are going to reimplement an API, and reproduce bugs in it, then you are incompetent.
He never said people will stop listening to music and going to movies. He said that people will go out of their way to stop listening to RIAA owned music and watching MPAA owned movies.
There are tons of independant record labels and movie studios that produce content worth listening to/watching.
Thats assuming noone would be smart enough to equip the *trucks* and *warehouses* with GPS antennas and build a controller that keeps track of RFIDs within its sphere of influence.
Then you could track RFIDs via gps.
People need to stop suggesting GPS as the end-all be-all of location finding technology.
People need to stop suggesting things are infeasable without actually considering them.
What they would most likely do is try to lisence the duplicating machine from you, lay off all the factory workers and sell all the cars they produce at the same price to increase profit.
Car manufacturers would still need designers and engineers to design new cars, they just wouldnt need the manufacturing plants. Then whatever this duplicating machine costs, they would simply price their cars slightly lower so most people wouldnt bother with the hassle.
I'm giving up my moderation points in this thread to post this, but did anyone else notice this line:
It may not host services for clients on other systems.
Technically, if you buy this license, SCO will know exactly who you are, and once they find you running your machine with an open web or ftp port they can sue you for breach of contract.
Now, IANAL, but that's exactly how that sounds to me, and I wouldn't put it past SCO to issue a license that the other side immediately breaches.
*Languages* are free in the sense that it's pretty hard to program in a language that won't tell you about it's syntax, keywords or structure.
I think you meant *compiler* but even then, because gcc is open source and borlands free compiler isn't, does that mean C++ is a bad language? Does it mean gcc is better than bcc? Or does it mean that it doesn't make a difference?
My mistake, I read: "I personally like that the browser windows are not all tied together, because if one of them crashes (yes, software programs do crash sometimes, MS or otherwise), it doesn't take down other instances of IE."
As "I personally don't like that the browser windows are all tied together"
However the information about IE is relevant, however IE taking other instances of itself out when it crashes has absolutely nothing to do with the program grouping on the task bar.
SCO is the owner of the UNIX(R) Operating System Intellectual Property that dates all the way back to 1969, when the UNIX(R) System was created at Bell Laboratories. Through a series of mergers and acquisitions, SCO has acquired ownership of the copyrights and core technology associated with the UNIX(R) System. The SCO source division will continue to offer traditional UNIX(R) System licenses to preserve, protect, and enhance shareholder value.
As early as May 2003, SCO warned Linux(R) users that enterprise use of the Linux(R) operating system was in violation of its intellectual property rights in UNIX(R) technology. Certain copyrighted application binary interfaces ("ABI Code") have been copied verbatim from SCO's copyrighted UNIX(R) code base and contributed to Linux(R) for distribution under the General Public License ("GPL") without proper authorization and without copyright attribution. These facts support SCO's position that the use of the Linux(R) operating system in a commercial setting violates our rights under the United States Copyright Act, including the Digital Millennium Copyright Act.
While some application programming interfaces ("API Code") have been made available over the years through POSIX and other open standards, the UNIX(R) ABI Code has only been made available under copyright restrictions. AT&T made these binary interfaces available in order to support application development to UNIX(R) operating systems and to assist UNIX(R) licensees in the development process. The UNIX(R) ABIs were never authorized for unrestricted use or distribution under the GPL in Linux(R). As the copyright holder, SCO has never granted such permission. Nevertheless, many of the ABIs contained in Linux(R), and improperly distributed under the GPL, are direct copies of our UNIX(R) copyrighted software code.
You can force XP to not group like programs by downloading the Power tools for XP.
As far as IE taking all other instances with it when it crashes, it only does this because you "open in new windows" and click File|New Window when you are using IE. If you run another copy of it instead (By double clicking the desktop icon, or single clicking the quick start icon), then when IE crashes it will only take it's Sibling/Parent/Child instances with it instead of everything.
Unless they add something vital to the workings of the system that make it LSB compatible and keep that closed source requiring you to use per-seat licensing for THEIR PROGRAMS.
I'm sure after being in the Linux bis for so long they aren't going to try to stop people from re-releasing GPL'd software, however they can and probably will stop them from releasing parts of their own software that is not GPL'd that sets them apart from the pack so to speak.
I don't know, I mean Integration and size are really nice when I'm carrying things around like with my PDA, Cell phone, etc. But with something that sits in my livingroom, I'm not so sure, especially where we are at in the development of it.
I bought the GameCube because it was cheap, I enjoy most of Nintendo's franchises and it does what it does well. It's a gaming machine. I already have a DVD player, etc.
And at $299 the XBox wasn't even something I would think about, but now at $199 it's a little more tempting, but the games don't seem all that great to me. Oddword maybe, PGR seems ok, but nothing really grabs me.
So what is the difference between "a toolkit that allows me to place objects, creatures, and players within the rules of the AD&D system" and something like Borland C++ Builder which is "a toolkit that allows me to place forms and components within the rules of the windows operating system"?
I don't intend this to sound like a Microsoft flame. But if you in any way think that *any* compiler is "100% compliant", especially Visual C++ you need to look a little harder. Every compiler out there in one way or another adds or "improves" standards in order to make their product more attractive.
Getting to the whole "Bioware Created everything" argument. What if I or a team of people create our own models, textures, sounds, etc only using NWN as an engine for our creation. Should Bioware still be entitled to what we created?
Slashdot Mirror
Welcome our new Cable-TV Overlords.
Sorry, I couldn't resist, I haven't posted one of these before, but it just fit sooo well.
And how exactly are they supposed to be able to tell that the traffic coming to the modem from a single device is actually NAT'd?
NAT edits the TCP/IP packets replacing internal ip addresses with it's own external IP.
The whole purpose of NAT is to be transparent to the outside.
Umm, he didn't invent Mr. Fusion, he had it installed when he went to the future.
Yes, of course, because everyone knows that when you reimplement someones API (Application Programming Interface) you code the internals exactly the same, including bugs!
The parent isn't insightful, it's a troll, do the mods that modded the parent even know what an API is?
An API is used to provide a generic programming interface so that the implementation is irrelevant to the the application.
If you are going to reimplement an API, and reproduce bugs in it, then you are incompetent.
He never said people will stop listening to music and going to movies. He said that people will go out of their way to stop listening to RIAA owned music and watching MPAA owned movies.
There are tons of independant record labels and movie studios that produce content worth listening to/watching.
Well, it may not be completely free but you can buy an engine license for Torque which *IS* the tribes engine.
Then you could track RFIDs via gps.
People need to stop suggesting things are infeasable without actually considering them.
Aren't generalities fun?
What they would most likely do is try to lisence the duplicating machine from you, lay off all the factory workers and sell all the cars they produce at the same price to increase profit.
Car manufacturers would still need designers and engineers to design new cars, they just wouldnt need the manufacturing plants. Then whatever this duplicating machine costs, they would simply price their cars slightly lower so most people wouldnt bother with the hassle.
So, what your saying is either no politicians are mothers, or your statement isn't always true?
Not once the corporations build their elite force of remote controlled plumbing robots.
Then they can plumb your house from indian at 1/10 the cost!
Technically, if you buy this license, SCO will know exactly who you are, and once they find you running your machine with an open web or ftp port they can sue you for breach of contract.
Now, IANAL, but that's exactly how that sounds to me, and I wouldn't put it past SCO to issue a license that the other side immediately breaches.
There are laws against that sort of thing, it's called "Animal Cruelty" and people do go to jail for it.
Not that I think the RIAA kills puppies or other small mammals with hammers...
*Languages* are free in the sense that it's pretty hard to program in a language that won't tell you about it's syntax, keywords or structure.
I think you meant *compiler* but even then, because gcc is open source and borlands free compiler isn't, does that mean C++ is a bad language? Does it mean gcc is better than bcc? Or does it mean that it doesn't make a difference?
I don't follow your logic there.
My mistake, I read:
"I personally like that the browser windows are not all tied together, because if one of them crashes (yes, software programs do crash sometimes, MS or otherwise), it doesn't take down other instances of IE."
As "I personally don't like that the browser windows are all tied together"
However the information about IE is relevant, however IE taking other instances of itself out when it crashes has absolutely nothing to do with the program grouping on the task bar.
You can force XP to not group like programs by downloading the Power tools for XP.
As far as IE taking all other instances with it when it crashes, it only does this because you "open in new windows" and click File|New Window when you are using IE. If you run another copy of it instead (By double clicking the desktop icon, or single clicking the quick start icon), then when IE crashes it will only take it's Sibling/Parent/Child instances with it instead of everything.
"Portage wants to download and compile GTK just to install vi."
/etc/make.conf and portage will not try to install it.
If you aren't using GTK on your system you aren't handling your USE options correctly.
If you don't use GTK add -gtk to your USE variable in your
Same with the almost 2 dozen other USE options.
Yeah, he is talking about LidRock
It's not all Pop, I see it advertised in some theatres before the movie starts.
I'll bite lacutis@NOSPAMchromotasm.com.
$1 ready and waiting.
Unless they add something vital to the workings of the system that make it LSB compatible and keep that closed source requiring you to use per-seat licensing for THEIR PROGRAMS.
I'm sure after being in the Linux bis for so long they aren't going to try to stop people from re-releasing GPL'd software, however they can and probably will stop them from releasing parts of their own software that is not GPL'd that sets them apart from the pack so to speak.
I don't know, I mean Integration and size are really nice when I'm carrying things around like with my PDA, Cell phone, etc. But with something that sits in my livingroom, I'm not so sure, especially where we are at in the development of it.
I bought the GameCube because it was cheap, I enjoy most of Nintendo's franchises and it does what it does well. It's a gaming machine. I already have a DVD player, etc.
And at $299 the XBox wasn't even something I would think about, but now at $199 it's a little more tempting, but the games don't seem all that great to me. Oddword maybe, PGR seems ok, but nothing really grabs me.
I dunno, YMMV.
So what is the difference between "a toolkit that allows me to place objects, creatures, and players within the rules of the AD&D system" and something like Borland C++ Builder which is "a toolkit that allows me to place forms and components within the rules of the windows operating system"?
I don't intend this to sound like a Microsoft flame. But if you in any way think that *any* compiler is "100% compliant", especially Visual C++ you need to look a little harder. Every compiler out there in one way or another adds or "improves" standards in order to make their product more attractive.
Getting to the whole "Bioware Created everything" argument. What if I or a team of people create our own models, textures, sounds, etc only using NWN as an engine for our creation. Should Bioware still be entitled to what we created?
That can't possibly be true.
Otherwise there would be HUGE continuity problems.
The most notable being Tasha Yar dying, then being there the next episode?
It has to be production order.
You mean you own a "license to operate windows" on your computer.