Possibility #4. Micro Black holes created in the upper atmosphere dissipate (not "evaporate", btw) quickly because of a different set of unaccounted variables (ie: the environment of the upper atmosphere)
Thinking that one understands all the variables in an experiment is a dangerous game. Chaos is everywhere.
Shooting down evolution doesn't grant victory to Judeo/Christian creationism by default. Given that there are thousands of creation mythologies involving sometimes teams of deities, giant turtles, lumps of clay and supercomputers owned by mice -- I'm not sure what ad hominem attacks on Mr. Darwin will even accomplish.
The real fun will begin when these uneducated nits attempt to rationalize their system over, say, Norse creationism. ( Odin laughs at your puny little Yaweh. )
Unless I'm not understanding this, it seems like at some point in the communication -- the font information is still being communicated to the client. Even if it's encrypted, it would still seem to me that the entire font could be extracted and rebuilt at some level just by viewing it.
How long until we see an application (or a web-based application) that does exactly this?
This is a very unscientific study, with far more potentially meaningful variables than they have accounted for here.
For example, these matching strings could just as well be common turns of phrase of the day. There doesn't seem to be any indication that the software was re-configured for common expressions of old English.
The study would be more plausible if works by two different authors IN ENGLAND IN THE YEAR 1600 contained 20 or so matching strings. But since that control group is missing -- so is the validity of the conclusion.
Jesus there's so much misinformation here it hurts.
Did you click your own link? Did you read the requirements of the ShareAlike license? Did you see the requirement that works that "build upon" Wikipedia must also be open source?
And if you think that scenario is analogous you need some education. By the way, the answer turns out to be 'yes' -- like OpenMoko, the hardware *is* opensource. on the device.
As others here have noted, there is technology here that is likely specific to this device. (ie: the Search capabilities, text display, memory management, etc.)
The question from a legal standpoint (and I'm not taking sides) is whether or not this product in its entirety is considered "building upon" Wikipedia.
Again, I'm not taking sides here, but anyone who thinks this is cut and dry has not read the license agreement.
Whether or not the hardware is derived from Wikipedia may not be the issue. You can't pick and choose what you've borrowed, and haven't borrowed under the ShareAlike license.
It reads like this: "If you alter, transform, or build upon this work, you may distribute the resulting work only under the same, similar or a compatible license."
I think that's very much open to interpretation. I'd definitely call this product "building upon [Wikipedia]".
Uh.. there is such a rule. It's called ShareAlike, and it very much applies to Wikipedia
"Share Alike—If you alter, transform, or build upon this work, you may distribute the resulting work only under the same, similar or a compatible license."
Slashdot Mirror
Possibility #4. Micro Black holes created in the upper atmosphere dissipate (not "evaporate", btw) quickly because of a different set of unaccounted variables (ie: the environment of the upper atmosphere)
Thinking that one understands all the variables in an experiment is a dangerous game. Chaos is everywhere.
True Trek geeks are waiting for the "Tricorder" chemical sniffer phone....
http://tekobot.com/nasa-ames-scientist-working-for-homeland-security-turns-your-iphone-into-a-tricorder/
It's always nice to see the phones we're not getting.... : (
I'm still sore about the Dell Android phone that's not being released in the USA
http://tekobot.com/dell-anounces-android-based-mini-3-smartphone-to-be-available-only-in-brazil-and-china/
Seriously, "BillionaireXchange.com"? Way to sound low rent guys. Was it a toss up between that one and "RichguyzAuction.biz"?
... they also make a DVD player that lasts 1000 years?
Shooting down evolution doesn't grant victory to Judeo/Christian creationism by default. Given that there are thousands of creation mythologies involving sometimes teams of deities, giant turtles, lumps of clay and supercomputers owned by mice -- I'm not sure what ad hominem attacks on Mr. Darwin will even accomplish.
The real fun will begin when these uneducated nits attempt to rationalize their system over, say, Norse creationism. ( Odin laughs at your puny little Yaweh. )
...and (wait for it... wait for it...) there are only 50 questions.
Just wow. 950 attempts to PASS a 50 question multiple-choice test? Is it safe to assume she's illiterate?
"You keep what you kill."
Now... what to do with this enormous botnet?
How exactly does one fight the economic problem? And does it involve giving everyone a pony?
"fonts aren't music"
No. They're much more expensive.
Unless I'm not understanding this, it seems like at some point in the communication -- the font information is still being communicated to the client. Even if it's encrypted, it would still seem to me that the entire font could be extracted and rebuilt at some level just by viewing it.
How long until we see an application (or a web-based application) that does exactly this?
WD LIVE blows this away, and has better playback....
A much better bang for the buck.
http://wdc.com/en/products/Products.asp?DriveID=735
Two better words: Small chips.
I guess we all get excited about different things.
This is a very unscientific study, with far more potentially meaningful variables than they have accounted for here.
For example, these matching strings could just as well be common turns of phrase of the day. There doesn't seem to be any indication that the software was re-configured for common expressions of old English.
The study would be more plausible if works by two different authors IN ENGLAND IN THE YEAR 1600 contained 20 or so matching strings. But since that control group is missing -- so is the validity of the conclusion.
It's just a warp signature. "They" weren't ready to make first contact.
Are we looking at the next generation of stealth technology?
Jesus there's so much misinformation here it hurts.
Did you click your own link? Did you read the requirements of the ShareAlike license? Did you see the requirement that works that "build upon" Wikipedia must also be open source?
No. Didn't think so.
And if you think that scenario is analogous you need some education. By the way, the answer turns out to be 'yes' -- like OpenMoko, the hardware *is* opensource. on the device.
Who's the idiot now?
As others here have noted, there is technology here that is likely specific to this device. (ie: the Search capabilities, text display, memory management, etc.)
The question from a legal standpoint (and I'm not taking sides) is whether or not this product in its entirety is considered "building upon" Wikipedia.
Again, I'm not taking sides here, but anyone who thinks this is cut and dry has not read the license agreement.
ie: Millions of people think Stross is wrong.
There's not much more to say on this.
Whether or not the hardware is derived from Wikipedia may not be the issue. You can't pick and choose what you've borrowed, and haven't borrowed under the ShareAlike license.
It reads like this:
"If you alter, transform, or build upon this work, you may distribute the resulting work only under the same, similar or a compatible license."
I think that's very much open to interpretation. I'd definitely call this product "building upon [Wikipedia]".
More importantly, the answer to everything in the universe can be summed up in two digits.
No we're not. That's an oversimplification. We're talking about selling Wikipedia. This isn't "accessing" the website. This is "selling" the content.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Text_of_Creative_Commons_Attribution-ShareAlike_3.0_Unported_License
Uh.. there is such a rule. It's called ShareAlike, and it very much applies to Wikipedia
"Share Alike—If you alter, transform, or build upon this work, you may distribute the resulting work only under the same, similar or a compatible license."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Text_of_Creative_Commons_Attribution-ShareAlike_3.0_Unported_License