First we had a "suspect." Then there was a "person of interest." Now we have a "potential person of interest." Where does it end?
Suspect
Somebody suspected of a crime
Person of Interest
Somebody suspected of a crime without direct evidence
Potential Person of Interest
Somebody not yet suspected of a crime but will be harassed anyway
Let me propose...
Person Capable of Wrongdoing
Somebody who doesn't agree with you and will have their lives ruined
Person Who Hasn't Committed a Crime Yet, But Probably Will One Day
Everybody else waiting for the Gestapo to show at the door
When I'm driving with a passenger and conversing with them, I seem to only be able to actually focus on one of those tasks at a time.
If I am concentrating on the road, I've noticed that I tend to block out the passenger. Sometimes what the passenger says will get processed a good 5 seconds or so later when I'm in safer circumstances (straight driving in my lane). And if I'm instead thinking about what the occupant is saying, I will tend to miss turns that I know full well I need to take.
During any of this, however, I am driving fairly well. I have never had an accident in my 14 years on the road. But my brain is apparently focusing its full cognitive abilities on the road and traffic, but leaves little else to work with in that regard.
You can either tell me how your day went, or we can get to the restaurant. But they are somewhat mutually exclusive.
Whether that technology is from one operating system or another... doesn't matter. It's about getting it into kids' hands. Anything that is contrary to that objective, and limits that objective, is against what the program stands for.
So let's just ship them Gameboys! If it doesn't really matter what technology we give them, we may as well provide them with Vtech kid computers.
But sure, it must make a lot more sense to train them on an operating system and development tools that they'll have no chance of affording until they own their own business.
How did such a great project lose focus so quickly? It ju$t doe$n't Make Sen$e!
Why doesn't Microsoft just bite the bullet and base the next version of Windows on Linux or BSD?
We could finally see a secure and maintainable version of Windows. And Linux might finally see its adoption on the desktop like it has always sought.
It is obvious that Windows has become stagnant. Adoption seems to be nil, or possibly even negative. When ordinary (read: non-geek) acquaintances go out of their way to trash Vista, you know it's in trouble. And I don't believe their code-base is the issue, either, since they've purportedly redone it. Instead, I think they're suffering from decades of complacency due to having no competition. And if they don't change their tune soon, they risk being surpassed.
OTOH, Linux is ready for prime-time. With technologies like HAL, Udev, and Dbus (amongst many others), Linux is easily growing out of its role as a server O/S. Everything is in place to create any kind of application, securely, from a Compiz-enabled desktop to a POS register. That's more than I can say for Windows, despite it being deployed on these platforms. The only barriers left are formalities and time. Linux is poised to dominate, and Microsoft must be aware of that considering their recent behavior.
They should take a hint from Apple, hit the reset switch on Windows and rebuild it from Linux. They could use their experience to develop a more modularized, secure, stable operating system than they have ever been able to offer.
They probably wouldn't reap the profits that they are used to, but then again they probably aren't doing that now. In fact, I would expect that they would divert some of their focus away from their Windows product line. After all, Linux-based Windows could be a nearly free enabler to all of their other product lines. Also, Microsoft could gain a bit of goodwill by contributing their changes back to the community and finally owning up to their so-called open source initiative.
It can be easily argued that Microsoft needs goodwill more than it needs wealth at the moment.
This is going to be interesting. In this age of technology and computerization, the rules for evidence credentials are changing drastically.
The potential for abuse is there. When log files can be forged and photos doctored with ease, at what point do we lose trust in the data? Proving that a footprint matches a particular shoe is a no-brainer. However, prove to somebody that the IP address you found in the logs of your hacked server weren't actually left there intentionally as a decoy. Clever as the hacker is, he even used the IP address of another well-known hacker so that there is no question of the MO.
SafeNet now needs to disclose its digital files, validation methodology, testing procedures, failure rates, software manuals, protocols, packet logs, source code, and other materials, so that the validity of its methods can be evaluated by the defense.
If video footage of a crime in-the-act is caught, should it reasonably be expected that all of the above information about the digital camcorder be provided to validate the evidence? The storage media also?.. and the computer used to view and process?
To mitigate the problem of abuse somewhat, a third-party could carry out the investigation. In this case, it seems the RIAA have done that. To what extent will they be required to prove their evidence? And to what extent will the jury even understand? Should we expect that every future case involving a computer require an expert witness in the area of electrical engineering to certify what the processor did? Obviously that's an absurd example; But where's the line? Perhaps with the jury.
I despise the RIAA and want to see the defendants have every avenue available to them for proving their innocence. But at some point it can just get absurd and it becomes a burden on the judicial system and taxpayers.
Governments have also become directly involved, with the Egyptian communications ministry imploring surfers to stay offline so business traffic can take priority. "People who download music and films are going to affect businesses who have more important things to do," said ministry spokesman Mohammed Taymur.
And here's a big difference with the US. If the US were in the situation of limited bandwidth, we would all be encouraged to stop sending email to give priority to those shopping on iTunes.
I personally view that as a good thing, since the US keeps using its position as the single most powerful nation in the world to push various agendas on other nations.
What's this? We're the most powerful nation again?
Seriously though, after all of the outsourcing, the fall of the Dollar, our inability to wage an effective "war," our ineffectual political system, our increasing world debt, the outward exodus of scientists and students, the latency of tech adoption, our increasingly draconian law, and the world's general attitude towards the US, I really am surprised that we still can call ourselves the most powerful nation. If stifling immigration was what the US was seeking, it has done a pretty good job of making the grass a little less greener.
I bet we'll start seeing more and more of these sanctions as the US loses its dominance and other countries become the key players. All we have left is a hint of respect and, unless we change for the better soon, it appears we'll be losing that as well.
The "OMG THEY CONTAIN MERCURY" scare tactic is the biggest load of anti-CFL bull put forth out there. The average CFL today contains around four milligrams of mercury,
And I'm supposed to scoff at that!? According to Wikipedia, the OSHA maximum occupational exposure to mercury is 0.1 mg/m3. That's one tenth of a milligram spread out over a meter. Somehow you haven't quite convinced me that inhaling four milligrams directly into my lungs isn't going to be a bad, if not a deadly, thing for me.
As for lead content, you'd better stop using computers of any kind, because all of them use far more lead during their production than any CFLs do.
When I start buying as many computers as I do light bulbs, I'll try to remember your enlightening comparison. Furthermore, we don't have an alternative to lead usage in computers. We do for light bulbs, thus it should be a consideration when deciding what type to develop, market, or use. The GP also made a very good point about the handling precautions of the bulbs that seems quite realistic.
While you probably won't believe me, I am actually a strong supporter of CFL. In fact, I gave my mom a lecture about switching over just yesterday. I have never had any concerns until I read the GP's post, which seemed to be level-headed and even provided a link for me to research on my own. Your rant, on the other hand, providing no convincing arguments and only succeeded in making you appear as an ass. In your effort to discredit the GP, you've only done the so for yourself and somehow gotten modded Informative in the process.
The $160 that the author is scoffing at isn't that outrageous if you consider that he paid for a hard disk and the labor to install it (though if his generation of macbook is anything like mine, replacing the hard drive is a snap. Still, using his auto analogy, mechanics get to charge you $100 labor to install your brake pads, even though it takes them only a few minutes).
I don't quite understand your logic. Because he paid normal price for parts and labor, he is obligated to give up his old, paid-for drive and all the personal data on it? So he should only get mad if it wasn't a great deal for him?
As you said, this was not warranty work or it would have been free. Apple acted as a service center and installed a new hard drive for the guy. Unless they worked out a deal beforehand, they have no more right to take his hard drive than they do taking his battery or any other piece of hardware.
If he had demanded the old disk and made a scene, he probably could have gotten it back.
That shouldn't be required at all. If you don't believe that people have an inherent right to their own property, then I politely request your home address. We'll see whether your views on ownership or established laws on theft take precedence.
The only place where WinXP is still better (given reasonable hardware) is games. That'll probably be changed around with 10.1 and the next generation of graphics cards. This is why I multi boot my main PC (3.8ghz Q6600), it's better for games not to have a full application base installed alongside it anyway so a separate partition makes sense.
And so goes the logic behind Windows. I never understood why I had to reinstall Windows every three months to keep it running decently. For a program to be bogged down by the mere act of installing/uninstalling other applications beforehand is insane. As far as I know, Windows shouldn't need to load Office DLLs in order to play a game. Maybe Microsoft should include a meter in the system tray akin to the battery charge that indicates how much cruft you system has been choked down with so you know when it's time to wipe and start over.
Also, I don't expect the next generation of graphics cards to improve the situation? Are they are going to be faster, so you won't notice the programming inefficiencies quite as much? Wouldn't you rather have a properly coded system that would realize the full potential of the new cards instead of knowing that you're still running with a 15% loss of efficiency compared to the previous OS (or compared to current OS offerings from other distributors). And the icing on the cake is that the performance loss is almost assuredly due to unnecessary and uninvited DRM.
I'm not trying to be antagonistic. I just wonder whether the cost of Vista's improved pen support is worth poor application support, poor hardware support, poor gaming support, annoying and poorly-designed security, DRM, more useless processes bogging things down, even less admin-friendly interface, higher hardware requirements, and more error-prone WGA lockdown. It's cost isn't insignificant, either. I know that Vista has some other (arguably justified) new features, but I imagine there's a considerably cheaper solution for XP to give you the same tablet functionality.
... if there was a backdoor, governments would not need to get warrants for inserting hardware keyloggers or custom malware on systems to access system information. Governments both in the US and elsewhere do this, which suggests that no backdoor is available.
I wouldn't dismiss the possibility solely on this reasoning. For all we know, the government will not require warrants for blanket digital eavesdropping in the near future. It has already happened with international calls, requiring only a presidential "signing statement." Now I don't want this any more than the next guy. Unfortunately neither I or the next guy is feeding the politicians' pockets (not to say politicians are even required with these obviously undemocratic signing statements).
I generally agree with your post and wouldn't quite strike the inclusion of the algorithm up to nefarious reasons. But I'm not convinced that there is no backdoor.
The front-end also plays a part in the efficiency, by allowing the spammer to check the message's SpamAssassin score before hitting send, simplifying the process of filter evasion and ensuring maximum delivery for the message.
Am I the only one that found the movie to be completely bland and devoid of any of the uniqueness that made the show what it was?
Don't get me wrong, though! I am a HUGE Futurama fan. I watched the show from the beginning and thought it was going to best new thing since sliced bread. And to be canceled... Part of me believes that this was the most ignorant decision ever made in television history. But I also understand that Futurama is NOT geared towards the bottom of the IQ barrel like the rest of today's television, and it wasn't going to last knowing that intelligent audiences don't make "good little consumers."
I honestly got the impression that they just bought the movie's script from an unrelated writer and stamped the good ol' Futurama cast on the project. This wasn't the Futurama I knew and loved.
One of the things I loved about the show was its witty references to technology and how the 1,000 years of advancement had only resulted in backwards-thinking and useless gadgets. Indeed, this concept is enshrined in the name of the show, Futurama, which is a reference to the now-cheesy, B-ish displays at World Fairs that attempted to predict technology of the next era (e.g. today). Those goofy gizmos never materialized in our own time, but they seem to thrive in the year 3000.
So I didn't find any connection to the series besides the unsettling number of previous characters they decided to throw in for nostalgia. Most of them were out of place, but some of them were just down right degrading to the movie and.. believe it or not.. even the show. For instance, just why exactly did they feel the need to utterly ruin the emotions we all felt in Jurassic Bark's story of Seymour?!?! I won't apologize for the punctuation. It's a mystery to me what was going through their heads when they decided to event put Seymour in the movie, let alone killing him in the most lame, unexpected, and unimaginative manner. Wasn't the idea that Seymour lived out his years missing Fry? So all of a sudden we have him getting to see Fry right before he gets burnt to death? SERIOUSLY! WHAT THE FUCK!?
I could have lived with a mediocre movie, but they had to go and screw up part of my love of the series too!
I can understand them wanting to give up ODF if only for solid technical reasons.
What gets me is that they feel compelled to create a standard that is compatible with OOXML. I understand why it might be a bonus, but to consider it mandatory is backtracking on the progress that FOSS has taken lately. I no longer see GNU/Linux as following in Microsoft's footsteps; In many respects it has surpassed what Redmond and others have to offer. We've shown that we can innovate.
While I don't completely agree with the mantra of "Linux MUST be usable by the average Joe," I do see this as our chance to make things happen. So why play follow-the-leader again?
Why would vendors take Linux seriously and start supporting it when they see it as a second-rate O/S that has to feed from leftovers?
On another note: Does this give any credence to Microsoft's claims that OOXML is superior to ODF?
It has been two weeks since scientists first tried to take the offensive with hurricane Murphy, and it seems the worst is yet to come.
Murphy was threatening the east coast as a, then, category 4 storm when scientists unleashed an assault of new techniques intended to thwart a disaster by gently steering the hurricane to a less populated portion of the coast. It became immediately clear that the efforts worked. Too well, in fact!
Hurricane Murphy took a steep turn to the northeast into the Atlantic, preventing all but the slightest landfall and causing practically no loss of life. The unintended consequence of this was that Murphy was now back in warm waters building power once again, something scientists hadn't predicted due to their underestimation of their initial efforts to divert it.
After about two weeks, Murphy has since looped back around to its original course aiming straight for northern Florida and Georgia. But the push back into the ocean has left it with a much higher force, so far reaching the higher end of the category 5 range and begging scientists to create, for the first time, a new category 6 level.
It has been decided that nothing will be done to coerce the hurricane this time as it makes landfall. Even if scientists were once again ready to release a barrage of new-tech weather weapons, they are not sure that they wouldn't exacerbate the situation.
<disclaimer>I am not a meteorologist, nor do I have a decent understanding of how hurricanes work due to my living in catastrophe-proof West Texas.</disclaimer>
Slashdot Mirror
First we had a "suspect." Then there was a "person of interest." Now we have a "potential person of interest." Where does it end?
Suspect Somebody suspected of a crime Person of Interest Somebody suspected of a crime without direct evidence Potential Person of Interest Somebody not yet suspected of a crime but will be harassed anywayLet me propose...
Person Capable of Wrongdoing Somebody who doesn't agree with you and will have their lives ruined Person Who Hasn't Committed a Crime Yet, But Probably Will One Day Everybody else waiting for the Gestapo to show at the doorWhen I'm driving with a passenger and conversing with them, I seem to only be able to actually focus on one of those tasks at a time.
If I am concentrating on the road, I've noticed that I tend to block out the passenger. Sometimes what the passenger says will get processed a good 5 seconds or so later when I'm in safer circumstances (straight driving in my lane). And if I'm instead thinking about what the occupant is saying, I will tend to miss turns that I know full well I need to take.
During any of this, however, I am driving fairly well. I have never had an accident in my 14 years on the road. But my brain is apparently focusing its full cognitive abilities on the road and traffic, but leaves little else to work with in that regard.
You can either tell me how your day went, or we can get to the restaurant. But they are somewhat mutually exclusive.
So ... They want to take away our soap box.
The ballot box is rigged, and the jury box is ineffective. They're only leaving us with one option.
So let's just ship them Gameboys! If it doesn't really matter what technology we give them, we may as well provide them with Vtech kid computers.
But sure, it must make a lot more sense to train them on an operating system and development tools that they'll have no chance of affording until they own their own business.
How did such a great project lose focus so quickly? It ju$t doe$n't Make Sen$e!
Why doesn't Microsoft just bite the bullet and base the next version of Windows on Linux or BSD?
We could finally see a secure and maintainable version of Windows. And Linux might finally see its adoption on the desktop like it has always sought.
It is obvious that Windows has become stagnant. Adoption seems to be nil, or possibly even negative. When ordinary (read: non-geek) acquaintances go out of their way to trash Vista, you know it's in trouble. And I don't believe their code-base is the issue, either, since they've purportedly redone it. Instead, I think they're suffering from decades of complacency due to having no competition. And if they don't change their tune soon, they risk being surpassed.
OTOH, Linux is ready for prime-time. With technologies like HAL, Udev, and Dbus (amongst many others), Linux is easily growing out of its role as a server O/S. Everything is in place to create any kind of application, securely, from a Compiz-enabled desktop to a POS register. That's more than I can say for Windows, despite it being deployed on these platforms. The only barriers left are formalities and time. Linux is poised to dominate, and Microsoft must be aware of that considering their recent behavior.
They should take a hint from Apple, hit the reset switch on Windows and rebuild it from Linux. They could use their experience to develop a more modularized, secure, stable operating system than they have ever been able to offer.
They probably wouldn't reap the profits that they are used to, but then again they probably aren't doing that now. In fact, I would expect that they would divert some of their focus away from their Windows product line. After all, Linux-based Windows could be a nearly free enabler to all of their other product lines. Also, Microsoft could gain a bit of goodwill by contributing their changes back to the community and finally owning up to their so-called open source initiative.
It can be easily argued that Microsoft needs goodwill more than it needs wealth at the moment.
Doesn't it look like a stick-figure playing air-guitar? Sans font
Coincidentally, it goes with the theme.
This is going to be interesting. In this age of technology and computerization, the rules for evidence credentials are changing drastically.
The potential for abuse is there. When log files can be forged and photos doctored with ease, at what point do we lose trust in the data? Proving that a footprint matches a particular shoe is a no-brainer. However, prove to somebody that the IP address you found in the logs of your hacked server weren't actually left there intentionally as a decoy. Clever as the hacker is, he even used the IP address of another well-known hacker so that there is no question of the MO.
If video footage of a crime in-the-act is caught, should it reasonably be expected that all of the above information about the digital camcorder be provided to validate the evidence? The storage media also? .. and the computer used to view and process?
To mitigate the problem of abuse somewhat, a third-party could carry out the investigation. In this case, it seems the RIAA have done that. To what extent will they be required to prove their evidence? And to what extent will the jury even understand? Should we expect that every future case involving a computer require an expert witness in the area of electrical engineering to certify what the processor did? Obviously that's an absurd example; But where's the line? Perhaps with the jury.
I despise the RIAA and want to see the defendants have every avenue available to them for proving their innocence. But at some point it can just get absurd and it becomes a burden on the judicial system and taxpayers.
Governments have also become directly involved, with the Egyptian communications ministry imploring surfers to stay offline so business traffic can take priority. "People who download music and films are going to affect businesses who have more important things to do," said ministry spokesman Mohammed Taymur.
And here's a big difference with the US. If the US were in the situation of limited bandwidth, we would all be encouraged to stop sending email to give priority to those shopping on iTunes.
I usually give up after the first false result. Sometimes I'm not so disheartened or red-faced that I will try to get another girl's number.
</obvious>What's this? We're the most powerful nation again?
Seriously though, after all of the outsourcing, the fall of the Dollar, our inability to wage an effective "war," our ineffectual political system, our increasing world debt, the outward exodus of scientists and students, the latency of tech adoption, our increasingly draconian law, and the world's general attitude towards the US, I really am surprised that we still can call ourselves the most powerful nation. If stifling immigration was what the US was seeking, it has done a pretty good job of making the grass a little less greener.
I bet we'll start seeing more and more of these sanctions as the US loses its dominance and other countries become the key players. All we have left is a hint of respect and, unless we change for the better soon, it appears we'll be losing that as well.
I'm gonna go build my own monuments ... with blackjack ... and hookers!
After watching the video, I can say that it's quite a nice monitor. All it's missing is a touchscreen.
Can you imagine the manly ora you would put off whilst using the crossbow to click things? I suppose you would need a good supply of arrows, however.
And I'm supposed to scoff at that!? According to Wikipedia, the OSHA maximum occupational exposure to mercury is 0.1 mg/m3. That's one tenth of a milligram spread out over a meter. Somehow you haven't quite convinced me that inhaling four milligrams directly into my lungs isn't going to be a bad, if not a deadly, thing for me.
When I start buying as many computers as I do light bulbs, I'll try to remember your enlightening comparison. Furthermore, we don't have an alternative to lead usage in computers. We do for light bulbs, thus it should be a consideration when deciding what type to develop, market, or use. The GP also made a very good point about the handling precautions of the bulbs that seems quite realistic.
While you probably won't believe me, I am actually a strong supporter of CFL. In fact, I gave my mom a lecture about switching over just yesterday. I have never had any concerns until I read the GP's post, which seemed to be level-headed and even provided a link for me to research on my own. Your rant, on the other hand, providing no convincing arguments and only succeeded in making you appear as an ass. In your effort to discredit the GP, you've only done the so for yourself and somehow gotten modded Informative in the process.
I don't quite understand your logic. Because he paid normal price for parts and labor, he is obligated to give up his old, paid-for drive and all the personal data on it? So he should only get mad if it wasn't a great deal for him?
As you said, this was not warranty work or it would have been free. Apple acted as a service center and installed a new hard drive for the guy. Unless they worked out a deal beforehand, they have no more right to take his hard drive than they do taking his battery or any other piece of hardware.
That shouldn't be required at all. If you don't believe that people have an inherent right to their own property, then I politely request your home address. We'll see whether your views on ownership or established laws on theft take precedence.
Yes, I'm speaking of telnet.
If god wanted you to use a GUI, he wouldn't have invented ASCII!
And so goes the logic behind Windows. I never understood why I had to reinstall Windows every three months to keep it running decently. For a program to be bogged down by the mere act of installing/uninstalling other applications beforehand is insane. As far as I know, Windows shouldn't need to load Office DLLs in order to play a game. Maybe Microsoft should include a meter in the system tray akin to the battery charge that indicates how much cruft you system has been choked down with so you know when it's time to wipe and start over.
Also, I don't expect the next generation of graphics cards to improve the situation? Are they are going to be faster, so you won't notice the programming inefficiencies quite as much? Wouldn't you rather have a properly coded system that would realize the full potential of the new cards instead of knowing that you're still running with a 15% loss of efficiency compared to the previous OS (or compared to current OS offerings from other distributors). And the icing on the cake is that the performance loss is almost assuredly due to unnecessary and uninvited DRM.
I'm not trying to be antagonistic. I just wonder whether the cost of Vista's improved pen support is worth poor application support, poor hardware support, poor gaming support, annoying and poorly-designed security, DRM, more useless processes bogging things down, even less admin-friendly interface, higher hardware requirements, and more error-prone WGA lockdown. It's cost isn't insignificant, either. I know that Vista has some other (arguably justified) new features, but I imagine there's a considerably cheaper solution for XP to give you the same tablet functionality.
I wouldn't dismiss the possibility solely on this reasoning. For all we know, the government will not require warrants for blanket digital eavesdropping in the near future. It has already happened with international calls, requiring only a presidential "signing statement." Now I don't want this any more than the next guy. Unfortunately neither I or the next guy is feeding the politicians' pockets (not to say politicians are even required with these obviously undemocratic signing statements).
I generally agree with your post and wouldn't quite strike the inclusion of the algorithm up to nefarious reasons. But I'm not convinced that there is no backdoor.
It's kind of sad, really. How can we win?
Technically, copyright does nothing to limit how he uses the work, only how he (re)distributes it.
Am I the only one that found the movie to be completely bland and devoid of any of the uniqueness that made the show what it was?
Don't get me wrong, though! I am a HUGE Futurama fan. I watched the show from the beginning and thought it was going to best new thing since sliced bread. And to be canceled ... Part of me believes that this was the most ignorant decision ever made in television history. But I also understand that Futurama is NOT geared towards the bottom of the IQ barrel like the rest of today's television, and it wasn't going to last knowing that intelligent audiences don't make "good little consumers."
I honestly got the impression that they just bought the movie's script from an unrelated writer and stamped the good ol' Futurama cast on the project. This wasn't the Futurama I knew and loved.
One of the things I loved about the show was its witty references to technology and how the 1,000 years of advancement had only resulted in backwards-thinking and useless gadgets. Indeed, this concept is enshrined in the name of the show, Futurama, which is a reference to the now-cheesy, B-ish displays at World Fairs that attempted to predict technology of the next era (e.g. today). Those goofy gizmos never materialized in our own time, but they seem to thrive in the year 3000.
So I didn't find any connection to the series besides the unsettling number of previous characters they decided to throw in for nostalgia. Most of them were out of place, but some of them were just down right degrading to the movie and .. believe it or not .. even the show. For instance, just why exactly did they feel the need to utterly ruin the emotions we all felt in Jurassic Bark's story of Seymour?!?! I won't apologize for the punctuation. It's a mystery to me what was going through their heads when they decided to event put Seymour in the movie, let alone killing him in the most lame, unexpected, and unimaginative manner. Wasn't the idea that Seymour lived out his years missing Fry? So all of a sudden we have him getting to see Fry right before he gets burnt to death? SERIOUSLY! WHAT THE FUCK!?
I could have lived with a mediocre movie, but they had to go and screw up part of my love of the series too!
Try harder! Try again!
I can understand them wanting to give up ODF if only for solid technical reasons.
What gets me is that they feel compelled to create a standard that is compatible with OOXML. I understand why it might be a bonus, but to consider it mandatory is backtracking on the progress that FOSS has taken lately. I no longer see GNU/Linux as following in Microsoft's footsteps; In many respects it has surpassed what Redmond and others have to offer. We've shown that we can innovate.
While I don't completely agree with the mantra of "Linux MUST be usable by the average Joe," I do see this as our chance to make things happen. So why play follow-the-leader again?
Why would vendors take Linux seriously and start supporting it when they see it as a second-rate O/S that has to feed from leftovers?
On another note: Does this give any credence to Microsoft's claims that OOXML is superior to ODF?
It has been two weeks since scientists first tried to take the offensive with hurricane Murphy, and it seems the worst is yet to come.
Murphy was threatening the east coast as a, then, category 4 storm when scientists unleashed an assault of new techniques intended to thwart a disaster by gently steering the hurricane to a less populated portion of the coast. It became immediately clear that the efforts worked. Too well, in fact!
Hurricane Murphy took a steep turn to the northeast into the Atlantic, preventing all but the slightest landfall and causing practically no loss of life. The unintended consequence of this was that Murphy was now back in warm waters building power once again, something scientists hadn't predicted due to their underestimation of their initial efforts to divert it.
After about two weeks, Murphy has since looped back around to its original course aiming straight for northern Florida and Georgia. But the push back into the ocean has left it with a much higher force, so far reaching the higher end of the category 5 range and begging scientists to create, for the first time, a new category 6 level.
It has been decided that nothing will be done to coerce the hurricane this time as it makes landfall. Even if scientists were once again ready to release a barrage of new-tech weather weapons, they are not sure that they wouldn't exacerbate the situation.
<disclaimer>I am not a meteorologist, nor do I have a decent understanding of how hurricanes work due to my living in catastrophe-proof West Texas.</disclaimer>
I think IFPI has a good chance of winning this court battle.
Okay, haha! That was actually pretty funny.
You almost had me for a second there.
Oh ....... OH!