Neither the article nor the PDF contain the work "backup". Please cite the relevant text.
It isn't in the story or the PDF because all of this derives from the fact that they found the emails they originally said had been lost. That is, moot.
As someone who routinely encounters too many junk hits in Google to make searches efficient, I'd like to see a dual-pane search that gives (a) raw results from the search engine and (b) search results from an updated, RDF-tagged, classified and vetted Yahoo directory
This could be obviated by any search engine by instituting a blacklist feature by which you can tell the engine to filter out all of the cluttersites like nabble, experts-exchange, "i'm hosting manpages!", etc.
Unless these guys have done a secure wipe with specially-designed patterns to eliminate residual information, why the hell isn't anyone paying one of the labs capable of such content lifting to read these drives?
They already found the backups. Please read the story next time. Cheers, luv.
Right, so when White House Counsel and Watergate defender Fred Fielding actually has the emails but rather than supply them under the subpoena is angling for a "deal" that doesn't require testimony under oath or any transcript it's just people being people. Totally aboveboard.
Keep in mind that in certain jobs, certain email practices commonly considered to be "lazy/efficient" are actually against the law. Like, you know...the criminal kind.
I think the main reason, the real reason, is advertising
Ugh, this is so backwards. By your terms, the only reason you posted was to garner attention for yourself and every other motivation and benefit is subsumed under that narcissism. Furthermore, you imply that there is something that Apple could do or a way they could release new software that sidesteps your cynical assessment of their business activities. Just because advertising is a means by which information is communicated doesn't mean that all information is advertising or that all software releases are advertising.
Well, that's a long strawmen about what you weren't trying to say, what about what you are? It seems that you're arguing for bureaucracy to have the exclusive ability to monitor public servants? That there is a line to be drawn? At a high level, you are arguing for authoritarianism by asserting that amateur oversight is or should be undesirable.
You also indulge in extremism when you say that you don't believe that "every member of the public is entitled to oversee every public servant in all circumstances." Who is arguing for that? And better yet, why shouldn't they? You seem committed to the idea that the public is not entitled to oversee the police, but does it need to be an instance of entitlement? You neglect to acknowledge that this could be merely public interest about public events.
Besides which, Open Office is in no way a real threat to MSOffice's success and market dominance. Like Microsoft is supposed to throw away their monopoly because someone else has made a word processor for free? Right.
because sometimes it is not on the hand of the company to open up the software, i.e., there are third parties involved, and it might be difficult if not impossible to contact all of them to get their permission for the license...
This is true, and points to a(nother) weakness in the patent system. Should it be possible to have orphan patents?
Leaving that aside, it might make a difference if these companies passing the patent buck to unnamed and possibly-unavailable patent holders would express some acknowledgement that they might be able to free some software if not for "x," "y" and "z." That is, to demonstrate that they would like to open things up further rather than saying it has to remain closed and proffering some excuse that sounds like it was made up as a rationalization.
Oh, I see. You're using CRAP (Challenge / Response Authorization Protocol.) Earthlink uses a similar system that works like CRAP. CRAP works really well to keep spam and other email out of your inbox.
Ha ha, "...and other email." The funniest bit of subtlety I've read this week. Thanks!
That being said, violence should definitely be taken into account for the argument of repaying society - violent offenders are usually not redeemable, but those who commit "white-collar" crimes should be made to repay society by working it off.
I don't agree with your Reaganesque assertion that violent offenders are not redeemable, but certainly white collar criminals should not be able to retain any portion of their ill-gotten gains.
Drug dealers are non-violent offenders. - I don't know where you buy your drugs but from what I understand most drug dealers aren't the hippy types giving it away for free.
So the fact that money is exchanged means it's a violent offense?
Until Microsoft actually reveals the patents that are being "violated" it really can't be judged what patents (if any) do and don't violate Microsoft patents. Until this happens, all we are being fed is hearsay and speculation.
Microsoft is the Dick Cheney of the computer industry (and/or Dick Cheney is the Microsoft of politics). There are as many Microsoft patents being violated by Linux as there are WMDs in Iraq. Trust the words of Microsoft at your peril.
The documentation this refers to is probably for Novells proprietary products, such as Zenworks, their virtualisation management stuff etc. That's really what Microsoft is most interested in
A few indie net radios offer Ogg streams for much better quality than the regular MP3 encoding on lower bitrates.
This is getting beside the point of the article (ripping), but unless something has changed in the last year or two ogg sucks for streaming. Sure you can listen to something via an ogg stream, but the indexing/seeking features of the format are either underdeveloped or completely missing.
Slashdot Mirror
But isn't this what the patent system is designed to do, to slow down adoption and reuse?
Neither the article nor the PDF contain the work "backup". Please cite the relevant text.
It isn't in the story or the PDF because all of this derives from the fact that they found the emails they originally said had been lost. That is, moot.
As someone who routinely encounters too many junk hits in Google to make searches efficient, I'd like to see a dual-pane search that gives (a) raw results from the search engine and (b) search results from an updated, RDF-tagged, classified and vetted Yahoo directory
This could be obviated by any search engine by instituting a blacklist feature by which you can tell the engine to filter out all of the cluttersites like nabble, experts-exchange, "i'm hosting manpages!", etc.
Unless these guys have done a secure wipe with specially-designed patterns to eliminate residual information, why the hell isn't anyone paying one of the labs capable of such content lifting to read these drives?
They already found the backups. Please read the story next time. Cheers, luv.
Maybe these guys are so busy sending emails to each other that they have no time left over to actually try their hand at competent governance.
Consider the possibility that the governing was being done with the RNC.com email accounts. This is part of what the scandal is about.
It's just being lazy/efficient.
Right, so when White House Counsel and Watergate defender Fred Fielding actually has the emails but rather than supply them under the subpoena is angling for a "deal" that doesn't require testimony under oath or any transcript it's just people being people. Totally aboveboard.
Keep in mind that in certain jobs, certain email practices commonly considered to be "lazy/efficient" are actually against the law. Like, you know...the criminal kind.
It was one of the best networking applications on the net, now your getting all these frills that are really making it lame.
3. Profit!
I think the main reason, the real reason, is advertising
Ugh, this is so backwards. By your terms, the only reason you posted was to garner attention for yourself and every other motivation and benefit is subsumed under that narcissism. Furthermore, you imply that there is something that Apple could do or a way they could release new software that sidesteps your cynical assessment of their business activities. Just because advertising is a means by which information is communicated doesn't mean that all information is advertising or that all software releases are advertising.
...renigged on a promise..."
Um....it's spelled "reneged."
I don't care why they were distracted, whether it is cell phone use, putting on make up, or getting a blow job.
A lot of this discussion could be mooted if cars were classified as deadly weapons.
Well, that's a long strawmen about what you weren't trying to say, what about what you are? It seems that you're arguing for bureaucracy to have the exclusive ability to monitor public servants? That there is a line to be drawn? At a high level, you are arguing for authoritarianism by asserting that amateur oversight is or should be undesirable.
You also indulge in extremism when you say that you don't believe that "every member of the public is entitled to oversee every public servant in all circumstances." Who is arguing for that? And better yet, why shouldn't they? You seem committed to the idea that the public is not entitled to oversee the police, but does it need to be an instance of entitlement? You neglect to acknowledge that this could be merely public interest about public events.
Besides which, Open Office is in no way a real threat to MSOffice's success and market dominance. Like Microsoft is supposed to throw away their monopoly because someone else has made a word processor for free? Right.
Well it worked for Firefox!
because sometimes it is not on the hand of the company to open up the software, i.e., there are third parties involved, and it might be difficult if not impossible to contact all of them to get their permission for the license...
This is true, and points to a(nother) weakness in the patent system. Should it be possible to have orphan patents?
Leaving that aside, it might make a difference if these companies passing the patent buck to unnamed and possibly-unavailable patent holders would express some acknowledgement that they might be able to free some software if not for "x," "y" and "z." That is, to demonstrate that they would like to open things up further rather than saying it has to remain closed and proffering some excuse that sounds like it was made up as a rationalization.
Oh, I see. You're using CRAP (Challenge / Response Authorization Protocol.) Earthlink uses a similar system that works like CRAP. CRAP works really well to keep spam and other email out of your inbox.
Ha ha, "...and other email." The funniest bit of subtlety I've read this week. Thanks!
There would have to be an explicit exception in the law allotting the public the privilege of overseeing them.
Nice, so oversight of the police is now a privilege?
That being said, violence should definitely be taken into account for the argument of repaying society - violent offenders are usually not redeemable, but those who commit "white-collar" crimes should be made to repay society by working it off.
I don't agree with your Reaganesque assertion that violent offenders are not redeemable, but certainly white collar criminals should not be able to retain any portion of their ill-gotten gains.
Drug dealers are non-violent offenders. - I don't know where you buy your drugs but from what I understand most drug dealers aren't the hippy types giving it away for free.
So the fact that money is exchanged means it's a violent offense?
public schools do nothing but breed statists,
Funny, because by saying that "x is nothing but y," you are being a statist. No wonder you post anonymously.
THIS IS SO FUCKING OLD.
Until Microsoft actually reveals the patents that are being "violated" it really can't be judged what patents (if any) do and don't violate Microsoft patents. Until this happens, all we are being fed is hearsay and speculation.
Microsoft is the Dick Cheney of the computer industry (and/or Dick Cheney is the Microsoft of politics). There are as many Microsoft patents being violated by Linux as there are WMDs in Iraq. Trust the words of Microsoft at your peril.
And why not, exactly? Oh, because they might sue?
No. It's because they write for Slashdot as well.
If a discovery occurs on an empty Martian landscape, and no one's there to see it, is it really a discovery?
It depends on whether the discovery involves oil or not.
Except that it clearly is.
Except that it clearly isn't clear that that's the case.
The documentation this refers to is probably for Novells proprietary products, such as Zenworks, their virtualisation management stuff etc. That's really what Microsoft is most interested in
Yeah...probably.
A few indie net radios offer Ogg streams for much better quality than the regular MP3 encoding on lower bitrates.
This is getting beside the point of the article (ripping), but unless something has changed in the last year or two ogg sucks for streaming. Sure you can listen to something via an ogg stream, but the indexing/seeking features of the format are either underdeveloped or completely missing.