I think it is more important to (try to) ensure Gnumeric works. So e.g. 1900 should be a leap year and ceiling() function rounds up (towards positive infinity). OOXML defines otherwise, btw.
I'll just take the American soldiers word for it Abu Ghraib.
We do own them humane treatment during their imprisonment and nothing more. So why don't you give them one? Show me one good reason why Geneva conventions should not be applied.
Don't you idiots understand? The money would be much better used by giving the poor food and shelter! They do not need computers. They need a coke and big mac.
So the price per email must be big enough for the users to notice but not too big to kill mailing lists. Very tough, but lets assume it is doable. Though I doubt it would work (spammer would just decrease number of spams per machine per month to 1'000-10'000). There already are limits imposed by ISP's, you know...
First I doubt the law suit would be against software makers - it would be against ISP's. That is because the bill came from the ISP, not from the OS/SW maker.
The liability - that is extremely hard question. Can I be liable if someone else is doing illegal things? It is extremely difficult for me to accept a law which would make me liable if the OS I'm using has a hole and a criminal uses it for whatever. OTOH the OS makers (and F/OSS OS's) would not accept such a responsibility.
So how would you phrase the law prohibiting unsecure PC's? Passing a "security inspection" is clearly silly - one month old inspection is almost useless. Forcing people to accept automatic updates cannot work, it has far too many problems. Prohibiting 24/7 connectivity? You'd be first to complain.
I agree on the principle, unfortunately I cannot see how it could work in practice, especially before OS's mature a bit (sandboxes, capabilities, mandatory access controls,...). Even those do not solve the problem - there is no difference between mailing list SW and spamming SW. The difference is the contents of the emails, not the SW sending them.
free market tends to eliminate monopolies, and does so more efficiently than government regulations can do, since regulations always introduce their own inefficiencies. Take AT&T. Show me how and why free market would have eliminated the monopoly more "efficiently" than the government intervention did.
Take Standard Oil. Show... But, please, do not do circular reasoning by defining "efficiently" to be what free marked does.
The free economists always ignore every example from history (yeah, I know, they have to, otherwise the "religion" would collapse).
The "opponents", OTOH, do not think government is (or can be) some "super entity" - they admit it has it's own (sometimes big) problems. The point is that in some cases government can just work hugely better than free market.
Take education. At least the country I live in (Finland) cannot afford to "lose" poor and smart(ish) people.
Take social security - at least I am willing to keep the "safety net". My morality just cannot let people rot in the gutters (not that government can *completely* avoid this).
OTOH government should not interfere with working economy/market. I fully agree that in practice governments sometimes do interfere too much. It does not mean living without one would be better.
You forgot one principle: sellers and (especially) buyers act rationally. Though arguably it could be fused into "complete information", but I just wanted to point it out.
MD5 is completely utterly broken. Sites like http://www.itconsult.co.uk/stamper.htm are now useless. Actually they are worse than nothing: this can fool people.
The fact that I can create good and bad version of programs is very bad: I can put the good, wait for scrutiny and then change to the bad. People have no easy way of knowing which one they downloaded (and are using).
It is very apparent it is only matter of year or two before someone can replace any file with another. Why wait for that? Why not replace MD5 as signing method now - before the shit really hits the fan?
Your belief that "white soccer mum" could not be terrorists is very... er... strange (not to mention racist). They are, after all, capable of torture, multiple murder, etc. Even their own children.
The recruiting does not go like asking people "are you willing to become a terrorist". It goes on like with scientology and other religious cults. The latest group suicide did include white soccer moms... perfect "material" for a terrorist group?
Furthermore, there need not be any leak. A would-be terrorist goes to USA. If s/he is arrested then the other terrorists know s/he was "bad". If (rather when) s/he goes through then the terrorists know what kind of people pass. This information alone would be sufficient to reverse engineer the acceptance function to a good enough degree.
Besides, there already are a lot of illegal immigrants and their number is not going down.
What makes you think people with spam filters are immune to spam? They might be more immune than normal people, but...
More to topic: the Thunderbird spam filter is not very good. Mine still has not learned that "{spam}" on the subject means 100% certainty that the message is spam. It does not understand if more than 1-2% of letters are non-alphabetic (e.g. "Vi@gra" or html or...) it is spam, especially if it is found in the subject or from lines. It has not learned that a gif image means it is spam.
There is no way to set the view (what hours to show, etc). There is no "add event" button nor can you do it (in mail view) with right mouse nor from menu. It does not understand tnef encoded (Outlook) invitations neither can it answer (to Outlook) invitations with "yes/no". It cannot share "available" info. When right clicking on the calendar the time of the new event has nothing to do with the place I right clicked - date is correct though. The reminder pop-up is not 100% reliable and sometimes pop-ups events from the past.
Yes, it has progressed, they have removed the modality of the "new event" dialog[1]. But then they insisted that I cannot have the "events soon" below e-mail folders (on the left bottom), it "needs" own frame (on the right), just wasting space.
[1] Extremely telling how far from usable it still is, it was still less than half an year ago.
Violence is necessary [...] He does not have to be violent So is the violence necessary or not?
Today's world is every bit as dangerous and violent as the ancient one First, I doubt very much this (there are no circuses any more). And even if it were reasonably close to truth I would not ever teach any children "violence is necessary". For example I have never needed violence. Not once.
Besides, army does not give "survival skills", it gives "killing skills". At least so in the army I went through.
I did a quick and dirty test. I allocated three vectors of floats and compared if to one vector of objects containing three floats (one million of them). Of course my experiment is far from scientific and especially tells nothing about your circumstances.
The result? The object version used considerably less memory.
I am confident we should not invent new mechanisms to a language just because something "feels" more expensive. Are value types really that much lighter in your case? Have you measured?
Just like stack variables - no need to add as it seems[1] Java 7 could be able to put some objects to stack (by using escape analysis, etc.).
[1] I am not sure if this is going to happen (and how advantageous it would be), but I have seen some talks about this.
The effect could be due to boiling. You know, it is known to kill bacteria and some bacteria undoubtedly is good for plants. Much simpler theory - which in itself does not prove one way or other (I fully agree with other posters: nuking is different from "normal" heating).
I am sick and tired of compiling several F/OSS (and proprietary) modules after every minor kernel update. And there is "new" kernel every month or two.
Please do not tell me why they "neglect", or rather work towards the PITA, I do know. I agree with their goal but I very strongly disagree on the means.
I've never understood Facebook (or myspace or linkedin or... the list is long).
After your post I tried to check it... it does not let you check it, without getting an account. I am not going to give email before I know it is "sensible". So, bugmenot! Bugmenot has blacklisted the site - dang!
There must be an... er... "open account" to check it. Right?
Maybe I shouldn't even bother. If someone insists I contact his/her Facebook I can will just say "yes" and forget it. No "missed opportunities" - rather "saved time".
"[...] lest the authorities give the impression that they know rather less about the rules (and the operation of encryption systems) than everyone else".
Slashdot Mirror
Oh no, the Imperial seems to be winning! Let's see can Metric match that, I very much doubt it.
:-)
A: "10 gram bullet travelling 1km/s has same momentum as 100kg man travelling 0.1m/s".
http://ofb.net/~jlm/oracle/oracle.365.10
Sorry
Yes.
I think it is more important to (try to) ensure Gnumeric works. So e.g. 1900 should be a leap year and ceiling() function rounds up (towards positive infinity). OOXML defines otherwise, btw.
What more you need from them and why? By what means you should get the information, is torture allowed?
Why is the Red Cross or anybody else not allowed to see the prisoners? Why is the list of the prisoners names given, even after this many years?
I think you are just trying to weasel out.
Don't you idiots understand?
The money would be much better used by giving the poor food and shelter!
They do not need computers. They need a coke and big mac.
Let's see.
...
...). Even those do not solve the problem - there is no difference between mailing list SW and spamming SW. The difference is the contents of the emails, not the SW sending them.
So the price per email must be big enough for the users to notice but not too big to kill mailing lists. Very tough, but lets assume it is doable. Though I doubt it would work (spammer would just decrease number of spams per machine per month to 1'000-10'000). There already are limits imposed by ISP's, you know
First I doubt the law suit would be against software makers - it would be against ISP's. That is because the bill came from the ISP, not from the OS/SW maker.
The liability - that is extremely hard question. Can I be liable if someone else is doing illegal things? It is extremely difficult for me to accept a law which would make me liable if the OS I'm using has a hole and a criminal uses it for whatever. OTOH the OS makers (and F/OSS OS's) would not accept such a responsibility.
So how would you phrase the law prohibiting unsecure PC's? Passing a "security inspection" is clearly silly - one month old inspection is almost useless. Forcing people to accept automatic updates cannot work, it has far too many problems. Prohibiting 24/7 connectivity? You'd be first to complain.
I agree on the principle, unfortunately I cannot see how it could work in practice, especially before OS's mature a bit (sandboxes, capabilities, mandatory access controls,
You might have year 1900 as leap year or not. You might get mathematically correct results from CEILING() or perhaps not.
But maybe you just don't care as long as it loads into your Word.
Take Standard Oil. Show
The free economists always ignore every example from history (yeah, I know, they have to, otherwise the "religion" would collapse).
The "opponents", OTOH, do not think government is (or can be) some "super entity" - they admit it has it's own (sometimes big) problems. The point is that in some cases government can just work hugely better than free market.
Take education. At least the country I live in (Finland) cannot afford to "lose" poor and smart(ish) people.
Take social security - at least I am willing to keep the "safety net". My morality just cannot let people rot in the gutters (not that government can *completely* avoid this).
OTOH government should not interfere with working economy/market. I fully agree that in practice governments sometimes do interfere too much. It does not mean living without one would be better.
You forgot one principle: sellers and (especially) buyers act rationally. Though arguably it could be fused into "complete information", but I just wanted to point it out.
How they handle zillions of zombie (Windows) machines is the question.
Relatively safe?
No.
MD5 is completely utterly broken. Sites like http://www.itconsult.co.uk/stamper.htm are now useless. Actually they are worse than nothing: this can fool people.
The fact that I can create good and bad version of programs is very bad: I can put the good, wait for scrutiny and then change to the bad. People have no easy way of knowing which one they downloaded (and are using).
It is very apparent it is only matter of year or two before someone can replace any file with another. Why wait for that? Why not replace MD5 as signing method now - before the shit really hits the fan?
Your belief that "white soccer mum" could not be terrorists is very ... er ... strange (not to mention racist). They are, after all, capable of torture, multiple murder, etc. Even their own children.
... perfect "material" for a terrorist group?
The recruiting does not go like asking people "are you willing to become a terrorist". It goes on like with scientology and other religious cults. The latest group suicide did include white soccer moms
Furthermore, there need not be any leak. A would-be terrorist goes to USA. If s/he is arrested then the other terrorists know s/he was "bad". If (rather when) s/he goes through then the terrorists know what kind of people pass. This information alone would be sufficient to reverse engineer the acceptance function to a good enough degree.
Besides, there already are a lot of illegal immigrants and their number is not going down.
What makes you think people with spam filters are immune to spam? They might be more immune than normal people, but ...
...) it is spam, especially if it is found in the subject or from lines. It has not learned that a gif image means it is spam.
More to topic: the Thunderbird spam filter is not very good. Mine still has not learned that "{spam}" on the subject means 100% certainty that the message is spam. It does not understand if more than 1-2% of letters are non-alphabetic (e.g. "Vi@gra" or html or
It really, really should have.
Unfortunately it does not work. Persons with either bad drug or gambling addiction will lose all the money given to them.
I use Lightning. It is POS.
There is no way to set the view (what hours to show, etc). There is no "add event" button nor can you do it (in mail view) with right mouse nor from menu. It does not understand tnef encoded (Outlook) invitations neither can it answer (to Outlook) invitations with "yes/no". It cannot share "available" info. When right clicking on the calendar the time of the new event has nothing to do with the place I right clicked - date is correct though. The reminder pop-up is not 100% reliable and sometimes pop-ups events from the past.
Yes, it has progressed, they have removed the modality of the "new event" dialog[1]. But then they insisted that I cannot have the "events soon" below e-mail folders (on the left bottom), it "needs" own frame (on the right), just wasting space.
[1] Extremely telling how far from usable it still is, it was still less than half an year ago.
Peacefully? You sir are an asshole.
I have a question: How many in your opinion must die before it would not be peaceful any more?
Google gives a couple of links for your perusal:
Besides, army does not give "survival skills", it gives "killing skills". At least so in the army I went through.
I did a quick and dirty test. I allocated three vectors of floats and compared if to one vector of objects containing three floats (one million of them). Of course my experiment is far from scientific and especially tells nothing about your circumstances.
The result? The object version used considerably less memory.
I am confident we should not invent new mechanisms to a language just because something "feels" more expensive. Are value types really that much lighter in your case? Have you measured?
Just like stack variables - no need to add as it seems[1] Java 7 could be able to put some objects to stack (by using escape analysis, etc.).
[1] I am not sure if this is going to happen (and how advantageous it would be), but I have seen some talks about this.
The effect could be due to boiling. You know, it is known to kill bacteria and some bacteria undoubtedly is good for plants. Much simpler theory - which in itself does not prove one way or other (I fully agree with other posters: nuking is different from "normal" heating).
Binary compatibility.
I am sick and tired of compiling several F/OSS (and proprietary) modules after every minor kernel update. And there is "new" kernel every month or two.
Please do not tell me why they "neglect", or rather work towards the PITA, I do know. I agree with their goal but I very strongly disagree on the means.
And that, my friend, is the problem. It is not going where I (the user) want it to go.
I've never understood Facebook (or myspace or linkedin or ... the list is long).
... it does not let you check it, without getting an account. I am not going to give email before I know it is "sensible". So, bugmenot! Bugmenot has blacklisted the site - dang!
... er ... "open account" to check it. Right?
After your post I tried to check it
There must be an
Maybe I shouldn't even bother. If someone insists I contact his/her Facebook I can will just say "yes" and forget it. No "missed opportunities" - rather "saved time".
Who wants to bet next Microsoft Office will create files 100% according to the standard, whether it is changed or not?
The password is included to avoid 5 years of prison!
http://it.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=07/11/14/2335202
"[...] lest the authorities give the impression that they know rather less about the rules (and the operation of encryption systems) than everyone else".