He never said black. Bling is a slang term, and is used in the hip hop culture, which as also spread to white, latino, asians and other races. It's now a universal theme. There is no racism here, you're just being over-sensitive.
Yes, where I work, I am paid overtime. Get this, I get paid 1 hour minimum if I receive a call even if it takes 5 minutes to fix and I am paid 1h for every 8 hours on stand-by, even if I don't get called at all. Of course, I live in Canada, where worker rights are important.
Push e-mail means your mailbox server tells your phone that you have new e-mail, instead of your phone having to connect every X minutes to find out if there's anything new in the mailbox.
And e-mail is pull. Your e-mail client connects and it pulls it down from the server (or a copy of it), be it via imap or pop3 or MAPI.
If you run a Datacenter off of Hardware you bought at Fry's, I don't want to be near it when it blows up. x86 hardware isn't all cheap, especially if you're thinking of a solid storage solution. Think stuff like HP XP arrays. Disks are the most fragile things, we swap at least a few per week where I work, there's no way we're running 1 SATA drive off the local controller for anything.
Except yours wasn't even a dotted decimal IP, having more than 8 bits in the 2nd and 3rd fields, and lacking a 4th field completely. A proper example would've simply used the reserved address space (anything over 240.0.0.0/4) in which there is no assignments at all. 242.242.242.242 would have been a proper example.
I'll say one thing from Microsoft - when you could use MS Java it never (not once in the several years we supported it) broke apps and patches were actually PATCHES and not whole new broken versions.
Rewritting history much ? MS Java almost killed Java by breaking every app written to the Java standard. They stuck with an old specification which they then extended with proprietary stuff and made developpers believe that it was Java when in fact it wasn't even at all by the time the court case forced them to remove it from circulation and stop calling it Java.
OpenOffice is not Java based at all. The bulk of it is written in either C or C++. Sun doesn't just have Java based products, heck even the Java Desktop System is not made of Java at all, it's just a modified Gnome, written in C.
Actually, there are 2 schools of taught on the subject. The first one claims what you are claiming, except in Comic book physics, it would be more the Juggernaut comes to a dead stop and the Blob is sent flying. There is also the second theory which states the Juggernaut is deviated from his course as he hits the blob and continues on his merry way in another direction, all the while, the Blob stays planted in place. This was a subject in the letters section of Wizard magazine a few years back.
You must not know of Hydro-Quebec. It's the reason Quebec pays half of what the rest of Canada pay for electricity and it is a profitable source of income for the provincial government.
Before you go generalizing, make sure there aren't any examples of why you're completely wrong.
I was still in HS logging onto the internet on 28.8, and surfing the web through lynx and there was no google. In 1997, I was in college, had a Cable Modem and surfed the Web using a graphical browser which had already been the norm for quite a couple of years (I remember being on the net in 95 with Trumpet Winsock, Windows 3.1 and Netscape 2.XX). I used Yahoo or Altavista as a search engine and while there were others (hotbot comes to mind), those were the principal ones.
You make it sound as if there barely was an Internet at that time while the Internet was already a very rich network by 1997.
This is their choice. They created their works and have the right to protect it. Copyright, Patents and other types of intellectual property rights are there to promote the advancement of the arts and sciences. They aren't there to garantee profit for ever. That is why they were made limited in the first place. What the RIAA/MPAA is trying to do is make them unlimited.
Also, if you use someone else's code freely and need to break copyrights on it to profit, why is it the GPL that is wrong here ? If the company couldn't afford to open source their modifications, they should have written everything from scratch to begin with. In this case, this is a hardware vendor, they make money off the hardware they sell, not the software that runs on it.
Defending our own freedoms does not mean we are for the FSF's political agenda. It just means we value our own freedom above corporate greed. Maybe you don't, and that's exactly what a shill is.
costs nothing? Hardly. It could mean the end of business for a company that has been built on open source and now has to release it. If they can't adhere to the license of the software they are using, and they can't profit without breaking copyright law, then they have no business being opened for business in the first place.
The GPL has clauses that say that you can charge a reasonable price for source redistribution (s+h charges, media charges, etc..). There is nothing that will put them out of business.
The difference is the GPL is trying to defend your rights as a user of the software by keeping all the modifications and source code open for everyone to profit from. The RIAA/MPAA is trying to defend their own rights by making sure none of their works ever reach the Public Domain where everyone can profit from them.
If you can't see the difference, you're a shill or a tool.
You can't easily "decompile" software. Without the source code, even if you can freely distribute it, you lose the freedom of then making your own modification or re-merging said modifications into your own fork, which might happen to be the main project. Essentially, any entity could hijack your software and make it their own. As a developper, that's the last thing you'd want to happen.
Why would free software be next ? Free software is distributed with a license to do so, the GPL. There is no illegality in Free software distribution as long as your respect the terms of the license given to you by the author. Patents are the next big fight for free software.
I loathe people who make this specious argument. If there were no copyrights, there would never have been a need for the GPL in the first place. There's a reason it's referred to as "copyleft" license; it's a direct attack on the evils of copyright. Actually, the GPL is very much in need of Copyright in order to work. You're thinking of something like the BSD License. If there were no copyrights at all, anyone could pick up any GPL project, modify it with some uber-cool new feature that everyone just has to have, then redistribute it without ever showing the source code to their modification, essentially turning it in a closed source project.
Copyright isn't evil, immoral or anything. It has been a part of the United States of America since they were founded. They still aren't evil today, but the people in congress who have granted almost unlimited longevity to them might have been misguided in doing so.
Of course, the article is about the government amending the law in order for the proper right holders to go after the sharers themselves. It is not about the Pirate Bay at all except for a brief mention that they were from Sweden.
If you share a file for which you have received authorization to do so in the form of a license, you are in fact participating in illegal file sharing. WTB edit button. Always preview a post before submitting I guess :
If you share a file for which you have NOT received authorization to do so in the form of a license, you are in fact participating in illegal file sharing.
You can sugar coat it all you want, if you are unauthorized to redistribute content, and you are doing it, what you are doing is Piracy. It also happens to be illegal in many countries, including the one we discuss here, where there are copyright laws that define the scope of what is legal and illegal distribution of said content. If you share a file for which you have received authorization to do so in the form of a license, you are in fact participating in illegal file sharing.
As much as you don't like it, it's the way it is. Not all file sharing is illegal, but not all of it is legal. Morals have nothing do to with lawfulness of it. Giving someone a copy of a book is not like giving 3,000,000 other people a copy of a book. If you wouldn't have paid for it anyway, why are you so desperate to have it ?
Slashdot Mirror
He never said black. Bling is a slang term, and is used in the hip hop culture, which as also spread to white, latino, asians and other races. It's now a universal theme. There is no racism here, you're just being over-sensitive.
Yes, where I work, I am paid overtime. Get this, I get paid 1 hour minimum if I receive a call even if it takes 5 minutes to fix and I am paid 1h for every 8 hours on stand-by, even if I don't get called at all. Of course, I live in Canada, where worker rights are important.
If you're this paranoid, how about you just don't buy a PS3 and just get one of the cheap desktop computers to surf the web and send e-mail with ?
A 999$ white Macbook.
And I hate people that don't know that the plural of box is boxes, not boxen. Xboxes. BOXES!!!
You fail.
Push e-mail means your mailbox server tells your phone that you have new e-mail, instead of your phone having to connect every X minutes to find out if there's anything new in the mailbox.
And e-mail is pull. Your e-mail client connects and it pulls it down from the server (or a copy of it), be it via imap or pop3 or MAPI.
Except people pirating your game aren't your market, they aren't giving you any money.
If you run a Datacenter off of Hardware you bought at Fry's, I don't want to be near it when it blows up. x86 hardware isn't all cheap, especially if you're thinking of a solid storage solution. Think stuff like HP XP arrays. Disks are the most fragile things, we swap at least a few per week where I work, there's no way we're running 1 SATA drive off the local controller for anything.
Except yours wasn't even a dotted decimal IP, having more than 8 bits in the 2nd and 3rd fields, and lacking a 4th field completely. A proper example would've simply used the reserved address space (anything over 240.0.0.0/4) in which there is no assignments at all. 242.242.242.242 would have been a proper example.
I'll say one thing from Microsoft - when you could use MS Java it never (not once in the several years we supported it) broke apps and patches were actually PATCHES and not whole new broken versions.
Rewritting history much ? MS Java almost killed Java by breaking every app written to the Java standard. They stuck with an old specification which they then extended with proprietary stuff and made developpers believe that it was Java when in fact it wasn't even at all by the time the court case forced them to remove it from circulation and stop calling it Java.
OpenOffice is not Java based at all. The bulk of it is written in either C or C++. Sun doesn't just have Java based products, heck even the Java Desktop System is not made of Java at all, it's just a modified Gnome, written in C.
No raid5-like parity in ZFS ? I don't think you've looked very deep into ZFS then. Try RAID Z.
You don't even have the same processor in both machines. Good going.
Actually, there are 2 schools of taught on the subject. The first one claims what you are claiming, except in Comic book physics, it would be more the Juggernaut comes to a dead stop and the Blob is sent flying. There is also the second theory which states the Juggernaut is deviated from his course as he hits the blob and continues on his merry way in another direction, all the while, the Blob stays planted in place. This was a subject in the letters section of Wizard magazine a few years back.
Went up, what did you expect ? Shareholders don't have social consciences.
You must not know of Hydro-Quebec. It's the reason Quebec pays half of what the rest of Canada pay for electricity and it is a profitable source of income for the provincial government. Before you go generalizing, make sure there aren't any examples of why you're completely wrong.
You make it sound as if there barely was an Internet at that time while the Internet was already a very rich network by 1997.
Also, if you use someone else's code freely and need to break copyrights on it to profit, why is it the GPL that is wrong here ? If the company couldn't afford to open source their modifications, they should have written everything from scratch to begin with. In this case, this is a hardware vendor, they make money off the hardware they sell, not the software that runs on it.
Defending our own freedoms does not mean we are for the FSF's political agenda. It just means we value our own freedom above corporate greed. Maybe you don't, and that's exactly what a shill is.
The GPL has clauses that say that you can charge a reasonable price for source redistribution (s+h charges, media charges, etc..). There is nothing that will put them out of business.
The difference is the GPL is trying to defend your rights as a user of the software by keeping all the modifications and source code open for everyone to profit from. The RIAA/MPAA is trying to defend their own rights by making sure none of their works ever reach the Public Domain where everyone can profit from them. If you can't see the difference, you're a shill or a tool.
You can't easily "decompile" software. Without the source code, even if you can freely distribute it, you lose the freedom of then making your own modification or re-merging said modifications into your own fork, which might happen to be the main project. Essentially, any entity could hijack your software and make it their own. As a developper, that's the last thing you'd want to happen.
Why would free software be next ? Free software is distributed with a license to do so, the GPL. There is no illegality in Free software distribution as long as your respect the terms of the license given to you by the author. Patents are the next big fight for free software.
Copyright isn't evil, immoral or anything. It has been a part of the United States of America since they were founded. They still aren't evil today, but the people in congress who have granted almost unlimited longevity to them might have been misguided in doing so.
Of course, the article is about the government amending the law in order for the proper right holders to go after the sharers themselves. It is not about the Pirate Bay at all except for a brief mention that they were from Sweden.
If you share a file for which you have NOT received authorization to do so in the form of a license, you are in fact participating in illegal file sharing.
You can sugar coat it all you want, if you are unauthorized to redistribute content, and you are doing it, what you are doing is Piracy. It also happens to be illegal in many countries, including the one we discuss here, where there are copyright laws that define the scope of what is legal and illegal distribution of said content. If you share a file for which you have received authorization to do so in the form of a license, you are in fact participating in illegal file sharing.
As much as you don't like it, it's the way it is. Not all file sharing is illegal, but not all of it is legal. Morals have nothing do to with lawfulness of it. Giving someone a copy of a book is not like giving 3,000,000 other people a copy of a book. If you wouldn't have paid for it anyway, why are you so desperate to have it ?