Actually, all of those items you named off are covered under the word effects; the term papers is an absolute reference to identity documentation, which, contrary to R2.0's belief, were commonplace at the time the Constitution and the Bill of Rights were written. I've already presented one of many examples in historically accurate cinema that focus on that period in which the requirement to show ID papers was demonstrated in a previous post on the sister branch to this one, so I don't feel inclined to do so again.
I can think of another example; in "The Scarlet Pimpernel" (the Anthony Andrews film released in 1982, I can't be sure of the exact date at the moment) there is at the very least one scene where a guard orders the main character to present his papers (identification documents). The film is set during the French Revolution, and makes a great deal of effort to be historically correct. The United States composed its Constitution (1787) a few years before the French Revolution (1789-1799) began. Government use of identification documentation was very commonplace at that time, and the Founding Fathers worried about the people of their new nation becoming repressed by the use of such documents in ways that could be used to limit their rights. I completely agree with you that the reference to papers in the 4th amendment is very clearly a reference to identification documentation.
He didn't say he switched to Linux to run DOS apps, he said he decided to switch to Linux, then discovered that he could use his old DOS applications again after the fact. Read the first part of his post again:
One of the unexpected bennies of going all Linux at our household was discovering that a bunch of Windows 3.1 and Dos software that no longer runs on modern Windows (games and educational) suddenly works again. (emphasis added)
When I switched to Linux, I made the decision based on my prior experience with Windows (twelve years worth, beginning with Windows 95) after being forced to Windows because of a printer driver issue. My experience with Windows was regular reinstalls, frequent crashes, even using XP SP2, and a long string of other issues, primarily security problems (such as finding that XP's TweakUI no longer offered an option for erasing the login name on the startup window, which, in my opinion, is a huge security risk, giving potential intruders a window into attacking your system; no other operating system I know of is this lax). For me, switching to Linux had nothing to with running DOS apps that were no longer available to me, but better reliability and stability (Linux crashed twice in five months, both times on shutdown, and I was still able to shut the system down safely, which I have never been able to do in Windows).
I've got "The Wild World of Batwoman" and "The Brain that Wouldn't Die", both of which have the original features; the only stuff cut out of the latter was a bit where the main character runs from his crashed car to his cabin with his fiancee's head in his arms, and in the former, the entire film is about an hour in length, so they mocked the whole thing. In truth, "The Wild World of Batwoman" was so bad, I pretty much just fast forwarded through the uncut (un-riffed) version, but "The Brain the Wouldn't Die" was actually only half crap (I actually managed to watch most of it without the jokes once).
I agree very much with your point; I've been a little bit of an offender here on Slashdot recently, but overall, it's much better to teach a person to type correctly first. My typing speed improved remarkably with a single typing course over the course of a semester in junior high; that was seventh or eighth grade, I can't remember which. Since then, my typing has improved remarkably; I'll never be a secretary -- one hundred plus words per minute in a real life scenario is an unimaginable target to me -- but I can do forty or better transcribing, and I believe I do better still when composing (I typically average a page in an hour or so, which involves erratic spurts of inspiration, so I have no idea how fast I'm actually typing). If I'd learned typing via an IM client, I doubt my present numbers would be even remotely as impressive as they are now. I always get carried away with this kind of thing, and I just wanted to say that I wholeheartedly agree with your post.
I know he's posted as an AC, but he makes a very good point, and states it in a way that is both hilarious and informative. I laughed hard when I read it.
I won't argue your point, primarily because I agree wholeheartedly, but taking a number of inventions that have been patented, it's equally possible to argue that some people are creating tools that surpass the stupidity of most members of our species as well.
I very much agree with you. My clean Gutsy install (on Monday; clean because I needed to get rid of some baggage I'd ended up with using Feisty) took about two hours, without an internet connection, because I couldn't get my dial-up to connect due to ISP issues. After that, a friend brought me to his house with my computer and we connected to his broadband to complete the upgrade and install the software I use most, which took about an hour, so I had the entire system upgraded in around three hours of actual work time, including the time it took me to make my way through the installation menus, though the travel time between my house and my friend's added another hour or so. I'm not sure what happened to the GP, but I can safely say I had no major issues at all (even the lack of internet didn't bother the system much).
I agree completely with your analysis of both Palatino vs Constantia and Times New Roman vs Cambria. The kerning on the Constantia normal font seems to be a little smaller than the Palatino, though with no noticeable advantage, but that advantage seems to disappear in bold, and Palatino clearly takes the advantage in italics, and Palatino is also, IMO, slightly more artistic and sharp than Constantia, which makes it easier to read; I've never used Palatino, and can't see that I'd ever use Constantia either. In terms of kerning and line spacing, however, Times New Roman is clearly superior to Cambria, using each line more effectively and ultimately taking less space, while still remaining completely legible and easy to read; in this case, I'm not seeing any other major advantages to the sharpness or artistic quality, but the words and lines per page advantage is one of the reasons I use Times New Roman as my default font for composing documents. Calibri does appear to have an advantage over Ariel in terms of kerning, but the line spacing advantage is clearly Ariel's, and the artistic quality and sharpness are also Ariel's; I use Ariel in spreadsheets, since it's usually the default, so while I might consider using Calibri more often under ordinary circumstances, I really can't see a practical or justifiable reason to bother downloading the font. Candara vs Helvetica is much like Calibri vs Ariel; the former wins in terms of kerning, but the latter wins in terms of line spacing, artistic quality, and sharpness, so I again can't see why I'd bother to download Candara to replace what I ordinarily use Helvetica for. Consolas is one exception I'm seeing, as its kerning, line spacing, and sharpness clearly dominate Courier, but Courier's still got the advantage (though only barely) in terms of artistic style; I rarely use Courier as it is, and I can't see any reason why I'd use Consolas (if I bothered downloading it) any more frequently than I do Courier. From my point of view, I'm not seeing any clear advantage either Corbel or Verdana have over the other; the former has superior kerning and line spacing, while the latter has superior artistic quality and sharpness, but I can't see any reason why I'd ever use either (I've never used Verdana). I just thought I'd point out my personal analysis of each of the fonts MS is recommending, and presenting valid, logical reasons why I wouldn't bother to change my font usage either. Sorry about the lengthy post.
Good point; well made. I completely agree that the cc and reporting companies should be held accountable for their failure to protect your information. Too much of the burden is placed on us for resolving such issues, and that, IMO, is very wrong.
I personally found my technical mathematics book an excellent resource; it costs a lot, I paid about $120 at the college bookstore, I think, though I got it used many years ago so I can't really remember, but it is a very good reference for everything from the crude basics (addition, subtraction, even real numbers), and goes all the way up to Calculus, though it doesn't define the core elements of integration. The title is "Technical Mathematics with Calculus" by Paul A. Calter and Michael A. Calter; the fourth edition, which is the copy I have, has more than 1200 pages, with good details, though it does have a few minor typos, particularly two incorrect formulas shown in the third appendix (though both formulas are shown in their correct forms in the text itself).
I believe this is a design patent; I commented on this within an earlier post, but here's the link: http://answers.google.com/answers/threadview?id=2434Google Answers: Determining Expiration Dates of US Patent. If it is, indeed a design patent, it expired in 2005, 14 years after the date it was granted, as the seventeen/twenty rule applies only to utility and power patents.
I just referenced patent law expiration on Google http://answers.google.com/answers/threadview?id=2434Google Answers: Determining Expiration Dates of US Patent and found that the following appears to apply here:
The "best-of-both-worlds clause" comes into effect if the application was filed by June 7, 1995 and issued after June 7, 1978, in which case the term is the later of 17 years from issuance or 20 years from filing. These terms are accurate for both Utility and Plant Patents, Design Patents expire 14 years from the date of grant.
As this would seem to be a design patent, expiration should have been in 2005 sometime, about the same time that Xerox sold the patent. There is additional information on the page that details the law of expirations that might be more enlightening, but I believe it's possible that the patent could have expired before the litigants bought the rights.
You mean someone at Microsoft actually noticed something?
I'll completely agree with you there; when a game, video, whatever, switches to full screen, any sensible OS should understand that the resolution change is completely unrelated to the OS itself and leave the desktop alone. That's been a problem for as long as I can remember using Windows for anything more than a curiosity (by which I mean Windows 3.1, which I never used on my own machines; I went to Windows 95 because I had to replace my printer, and it wouldn't support DOS). If that is still a 'feature' after twelve years, that tells me they aren't serious about anything. (Wouldn't know myself; I've switched to Ubuntu, and Microsoft won't ever win me back.)
Good point. I've seen a number of protocols, along with file formats, etc., Microsoft itself claims to have come up with, then have dropped without explanation. One of the worst is the MS Word format (which I think sucks anyway), which keeps changing with every version. Files created in Word 2000, for example, won't open in Word '97, and I know a professor who is now getting Word 2007 documents he can't open because he's still got the previous version. I compare that to WordPerfect, which hasn't made an overall file structure change since version 6; WordPerfect 6 might not be able to fully interpret every new tag in files created by later versions, such as spelling correction tags, but it simply ignores any code it doesn't recognize, so WordPerfect 6 can still open any file created by, for example, WordPerfect 12 with minimal data loss. I'm not saying the WordPerfect format is perfect, because it isn't, but it's much better than MS Word's.
I expanded the Calc cell to several inches and set the numeric format to show me the last 20 digits of the answer, and I got exactly what the GP claims. I'll have to remember that and find out what QuattroPro gives me once I get it installed on my VM.
Your comment shows that it is you, not the AC, who doesn't know what "Bricking" means; the term brick, as applied to electronics, is literally a device of any kind that cannot function in any capacity. That means that the electronic part (computer, router, or whatever) receives power, but is incapable of doing anything useful (except produce heat). A bricked computer will not start at all; the power will probably come on and the power supply fan will run, but the computer won't show anything on the screen. If a customer renders the computer inoperable to them, the odds that they've bricked the machine are infinitesimally minimal; very few people have any idea how to flash firmware at all, and I can't think of a single machine on the market that could be rendered completely useless without flashing the firmware. Furthermore, the number of average laymen who are even remotely familiar with the term brick, as related to computers, is also tiny -- every layman who I've ever encountered who heard the term couldn't comprehend what was being talked about, as they, quite reasonably, thought that the term referred to 'stone and mortar', and had to have the definition explained, often in great detail, before they understood -- so the odds of any layman nursing fears of bricking a $1000 machine are laughable. I read both of your comments thoroughly, and found them unconvincing, to say the least; the AC's response, at least, had a meaningful, reasoned response based on facts.
I'm not sure that's the best method Apple could use; Steve Jobs himself said he has no intention of selling junk, and that is a fairly accurate description of most of the hardware in the cheap machines on the market. The Mac is more expensive, true, but the hardware is also very high quality.
I'd say insightful, which is what it was modded at when I reached the page, is a decent replacement to informative; his comment does bring insight into Apple's mode of thinking, if nothing more.
Microsoft's common "peacefully coexist" comments remind me of the Star Trek: The Next Generation episode Conspiracy; in my experience, those that claim to seek peaceful coexistence are always those who desire to control. Those who desire true peace generally avoid commenting since coexistence is wholly meaningless.
Of course, getting hold of the nude photos of you would probably be very difficult and would constitute an invasion of your privacy you probably wouldn't settle for, unless of course, you published them yourself. Besides, the typical hacker-geek body, if the person is Caucasian, would probably blind anyone who tried looking at it; I know mine would.
I'll concede that Mac OS X is somewhat dumbed down, but it's a lot more flexible in many ways than Windows (why else would I keep using it regularly) and unquestionably more secure. In my opinion, Windows is too complex and inconsistent to call dumbed down; understanding the meaning of the many control panels, for example, is very difficult, if not impossible, for the general user to understand, whereas the system preference names for both Linux and the Mac OS are very clearly defined and usually self-explanatory. The actual interfaces for those control panel/system preference dialogs are also more confusing in Windows than on the Mac OS or Linux, and frequently require nesting through dozens of windows to do what the *nix based interfaces do in one. The only Linux interface I've been less than satisfied with at the present is the network interface, but since I don't have to worry about that much (my network simply works, and the only issues I've had have been router related), that isn't really a major issue.
That said, I'm totally with you that Ubuntu is not 'dumbed down', but designed for the use of anyone; as a power user, I'm no more limited than I would be with any other Linux system, and I haven't seen much, if anything, that a casual user would easily be able to do in Windows or the Mac OS that can't be done by the same casual user in Ubuntu. I'm totally with you when you mention configuring the system; I even upgraded video cards, and didn't have to worry about a thing because nVidia and Ubuntu made the transition so simple. Anyway, my point is that I think your post is very good and concise. Sorry about the long post, but I frequently get carried away when I write responses. Thank you.
Slashdot Mirror
Actually, all of those items you named off are covered under the word effects; the term papers is an absolute reference to identity documentation, which, contrary to R2.0's belief, were commonplace at the time the Constitution and the Bill of Rights were written. I've already presented one of many examples in historically accurate cinema that focus on that period in which the requirement to show ID papers was demonstrated in a previous post on the sister branch to this one, so I don't feel inclined to do so again.
I can think of another example; in "The Scarlet Pimpernel" (the Anthony Andrews film released in 1982, I can't be sure of the exact date at the moment) there is at the very least one scene where a guard orders the main character to present his papers (identification documents). The film is set during the French Revolution, and makes a great deal of effort to be historically correct. The United States composed its Constitution (1787) a few years before the French Revolution (1789-1799) began. Government use of identification documentation was very commonplace at that time, and the Founding Fathers worried about the people of their new nation becoming repressed by the use of such documents in ways that could be used to limit their rights. I completely agree with you that the reference to papers in the 4th amendment is very clearly a reference to identification documentation.
Actually, the question on my mind was why'd they try to blend?
Can't say; no one's ever replied to my sig, and I've never changed it (since I added it about two months ago, that is; before then, I had no sig).
When I switched to Linux, I made the decision based on my prior experience with Windows (twelve years worth, beginning with Windows 95) after being forced to Windows because of a printer driver issue. My experience with Windows was regular reinstalls, frequent crashes, even using XP SP2, and a long string of other issues, primarily security problems (such as finding that XP's TweakUI no longer offered an option for erasing the login name on the startup window, which, in my opinion, is a huge security risk, giving potential intruders a window into attacking your system; no other operating system I know of is this lax). For me, switching to Linux had nothing to with running DOS apps that were no longer available to me, but better reliability and stability (Linux crashed twice in five months, both times on shutdown, and I was still able to shut the system down safely, which I have never been able to do in Windows).
I've got "The Wild World of Batwoman" and "The Brain that Wouldn't Die", both of which have the original features; the only stuff cut out of the latter was a bit where the main character runs from his crashed car to his cabin with his fiancee's head in his arms, and in the former, the entire film is about an hour in length, so they mocked the whole thing. In truth, "The Wild World of Batwoman" was so bad, I pretty much just fast forwarded through the uncut (un-riffed) version, but "The Brain the Wouldn't Die" was actually only half crap (I actually managed to watch most of it without the jokes once).
I agree very much with your point; I've been a little bit of an offender here on Slashdot recently, but overall, it's much better to teach a person to type correctly first. My typing speed improved remarkably with a single typing course over the course of a semester in junior high; that was seventh or eighth grade, I can't remember which. Since then, my typing has improved remarkably; I'll never be a secretary -- one hundred plus words per minute in a real life scenario is an unimaginable target to me -- but I can do forty or better transcribing, and I believe I do better still when composing (I typically average a page in an hour or so, which involves erratic spurts of inspiration, so I have no idea how fast I'm actually typing). If I'd learned typing via an IM client, I doubt my present numbers would be even remotely as impressive as they are now. I always get carried away with this kind of thing, and I just wanted to say that I wholeheartedly agree with your post.
I know he's posted as an AC, but he makes a very good point, and states it in a way that is both hilarious and informative. I laughed hard when I read it.
I won't argue your point, primarily because I agree wholeheartedly, but taking a number of inventions that have been patented, it's equally possible to argue that some people are creating tools that surpass the stupidity of most members of our species as well.
I very much agree with you. My clean Gutsy install (on Monday; clean because I needed to get rid of some baggage I'd ended up with using Feisty) took about two hours, without an internet connection, because I couldn't get my dial-up to connect due to ISP issues. After that, a friend brought me to his house with my computer and we connected to his broadband to complete the upgrade and install the software I use most, which took about an hour, so I had the entire system upgraded in around three hours of actual work time, including the time it took me to make my way through the installation menus, though the travel time between my house and my friend's added another hour or so. I'm not sure what happened to the GP, but I can safely say I had no major issues at all (even the lack of internet didn't bother the system much).
I agree completely with your analysis of both Palatino vs Constantia and Times New Roman vs Cambria. The kerning on the Constantia normal font seems to be a little smaller than the Palatino, though with no noticeable advantage, but that advantage seems to disappear in bold, and Palatino clearly takes the advantage in italics, and Palatino is also, IMO, slightly more artistic and sharp than Constantia, which makes it easier to read; I've never used Palatino, and can't see that I'd ever use Constantia either. In terms of kerning and line spacing, however, Times New Roman is clearly superior to Cambria, using each line more effectively and ultimately taking less space, while still remaining completely legible and easy to read; in this case, I'm not seeing any other major advantages to the sharpness or artistic quality, but the words and lines per page advantage is one of the reasons I use Times New Roman as my default font for composing documents. Calibri does appear to have an advantage over Ariel in terms of kerning, but the line spacing advantage is clearly Ariel's, and the artistic quality and sharpness are also Ariel's; I use Ariel in spreadsheets, since it's usually the default, so while I might consider using Calibri more often under ordinary circumstances, I really can't see a practical or justifiable reason to bother downloading the font. Candara vs Helvetica is much like Calibri vs Ariel; the former wins in terms of kerning, but the latter wins in terms of line spacing, artistic quality, and sharpness, so I again can't see why I'd bother to download Candara to replace what I ordinarily use Helvetica for. Consolas is one exception I'm seeing, as its kerning, line spacing, and sharpness clearly dominate Courier, but Courier's still got the advantage (though only barely) in terms of artistic style; I rarely use Courier as it is, and I can't see any reason why I'd use Consolas (if I bothered downloading it) any more frequently than I do Courier. From my point of view, I'm not seeing any clear advantage either Corbel or Verdana have over the other; the former has superior kerning and line spacing, while the latter has superior artistic quality and sharpness, but I can't see any reason why I'd ever use either (I've never used Verdana). I just thought I'd point out my personal analysis of each of the fonts MS is recommending, and presenting valid, logical reasons why I wouldn't bother to change my font usage either. Sorry about the lengthy post.
Good point; well made. I completely agree that the cc and reporting companies should be held accountable for their failure to protect your information. Too much of the burden is placed on us for resolving such issues, and that, IMO, is very wrong.
I personally found my technical mathematics book an excellent resource; it costs a lot, I paid about $120 at the college bookstore, I think, though I got it used many years ago so I can't really remember, but it is a very good reference for everything from the crude basics (addition, subtraction, even real numbers), and goes all the way up to Calculus, though it doesn't define the core elements of integration. The title is "Technical Mathematics with Calculus" by Paul A. Calter and Michael A. Calter; the fourth edition, which is the copy I have, has more than 1200 pages, with good details, though it does have a few minor typos, particularly two incorrect formulas shown in the third appendix (though both formulas are shown in their correct forms in the text itself).
I believe this is a design patent; I commented on this within an earlier post, but here's the link: http://answers.google.com/answers/threadview?id=2434Google Answers: Determining Expiration Dates of US Patent. If it is, indeed a design patent, it expired in 2005, 14 years after the date it was granted, as the seventeen/twenty rule applies only to utility and power patents.
As this would seem to be a design patent, expiration should have been in 2005 sometime, about the same time that Xerox sold the patent. There is additional information on the page that details the law of expirations that might be more enlightening, but I believe it's possible that the patent could have expired before the litigants bought the rights.
I'll completely agree with you there; when a game, video, whatever, switches to full screen, any sensible OS should understand that the resolution change is completely unrelated to the OS itself and leave the desktop alone. That's been a problem for as long as I can remember using Windows for anything more than a curiosity (by which I mean Windows 3.1, which I never used on my own machines; I went to Windows 95 because I had to replace my printer, and it wouldn't support DOS). If that is still a 'feature' after twelve years, that tells me they aren't serious about anything. (Wouldn't know myself; I've switched to Ubuntu, and Microsoft won't ever win me back.)
Good point. I've seen a number of protocols, along with file formats, etc., Microsoft itself claims to have come up with, then have dropped without explanation. One of the worst is the MS Word format (which I think sucks anyway), which keeps changing with every version. Files created in Word 2000, for example, won't open in Word '97, and I know a professor who is now getting Word 2007 documents he can't open because he's still got the previous version. I compare that to WordPerfect, which hasn't made an overall file structure change since version 6; WordPerfect 6 might not be able to fully interpret every new tag in files created by later versions, such as spelling correction tags, but it simply ignores any code it doesn't recognize, so WordPerfect 6 can still open any file created by, for example, WordPerfect 12 with minimal data loss. I'm not saying the WordPerfect format is perfect, because it isn't, but it's much better than MS Word's.
I expanded the Calc cell to several inches and set the numeric format to show me the last 20 digits of the answer, and I got exactly what the GP claims. I'll have to remember that and find out what QuattroPro gives me once I get it installed on my VM.
Your comment shows that it is you, not the AC, who doesn't know what "Bricking" means; the term brick, as applied to electronics, is literally a device of any kind that cannot function in any capacity. That means that the electronic part (computer, router, or whatever) receives power, but is incapable of doing anything useful (except produce heat). A bricked computer will not start at all; the power will probably come on and the power supply fan will run, but the computer won't show anything on the screen. If a customer renders the computer inoperable to them, the odds that they've bricked the machine are infinitesimally minimal; very few people have any idea how to flash firmware at all, and I can't think of a single machine on the market that could be rendered completely useless without flashing the firmware. Furthermore, the number of average laymen who are even remotely familiar with the term brick, as related to computers, is also tiny -- every layman who I've ever encountered who heard the term couldn't comprehend what was being talked about, as they, quite reasonably, thought that the term referred to 'stone and mortar', and had to have the definition explained, often in great detail, before they understood -- so the odds of any layman nursing fears of bricking a $1000 machine are laughable. I read both of your comments thoroughly, and found them unconvincing, to say the least; the AC's response, at least, had a meaningful, reasoned response based on facts.
I'm not sure that's the best method Apple could use; Steve Jobs himself said he has no intention of selling junk, and that is a fairly accurate description of most of the hardware in the cheap machines on the market. The Mac is more expensive, true, but the hardware is also very high quality.
I'd say insightful, which is what it was modded at when I reached the page, is a decent replacement to informative; his comment does bring insight into Apple's mode of thinking, if nothing more.
Microsoft's common "peacefully coexist" comments remind me of the Star Trek: The Next Generation episode Conspiracy; in my experience, those that claim to seek peaceful coexistence are always those who desire to control. Those who desire true peace generally avoid commenting since coexistence is wholly meaningless.
Of course, getting hold of the nude photos of you would probably be very difficult and would constitute an invasion of your privacy you probably wouldn't settle for, unless of course, you published them yourself. Besides, the typical hacker-geek body, if the person is Caucasian, would probably blind anyone who tried looking at it; I know mine would.
No, they already are in flames.
That said, I'm totally with you that Ubuntu is not 'dumbed down', but designed for the use of anyone; as a power user, I'm no more limited than I would be with any other Linux system, and I haven't seen much, if anything, that a casual user would easily be able to do in Windows or the Mac OS that can't be done by the same casual user in Ubuntu. I'm totally with you when you mention configuring the system; I even upgraded video cards, and didn't have to worry about a thing because nVidia and Ubuntu made the transition so simple. Anyway, my point is that I think your post is very good and concise. Sorry about the long post, but I frequently get carried away when I write responses. Thank you.