In Google's calculus, and Google is notorious for their data driven, analytic culture, having a clean front page uncluttered by advertising continues to be worth more than any advertisements they could put there.
Even now they are very ambivalent with regard to advertising. The have the most high value piece of internet real estate in existence (http://www.google.co.uk/) and it does not contain a single advert.
You're totally wrong, there are tons of ads on the Google search engine, just not on the landing page. That's because untargeted ads aren't worth much. Why clutter up the page (which turns off users) and waste impressions (which turns off advertisers) by showing irrelevant ads (which also turns off users), before you know what the user is searching for?
People are coming down on "Google" but I was under the impression that this was just some Google engineer's pet project ("20%" time) with maybe some help from his friends there. Lots of stuff coming out of Google is like this because of Google's very liberal policies. However, people always act like everything that comes out of the company is some strategic product driven by the highest levels.
But in response to the claim that it will someday support the argument that torrents have substantially non-infringing uses, it's fair to point out that it is far more likely to damage such arguments.
Sayeth the SCOTUS:
[...]The staple article of commerce doctrine must strike a balance between a copyright holder‘s legitimate demand for effective -- not merely symbolic -- protection of the statutory monopoly, and the rights of others freely to engage in substantially unrelated areas of commerce. Accordingly, the sale of copying equipment, like the sale of other articles of commerce, does not constitute contributory infringement if the product is widely used for legitimate, unobjectionable purposes. Indeed, it need merely be capable of substantial noninfringing uses.
That's from the Betamax case (emphasis mine,) and it was affirmed in Grokster. It doesn't matter if 90% of users are infringing. Notwithstanding evidence that the software creators intended their users to infringe or induced them to do so, it's enough that the software is merely capable of some significant noninfringing use. Significant here refers to the quality of the use, not the quantity.
- If you are asked during the interview how much you are expecting to make at the new position, a correct answer is "I earn $XXXX at my current job and I am certain you will be fair, but I would like to lean more about the company".
How much you're currently making at some other place is really none of their business. Putting out a number early on in the process like that is a terrible way to negotiate. If you're looking to make substantially more money at your next job then you're never going to get it if you reveal your current salary. At best your offer will be slightly above whatever number you put out, especially if they had a higher number in mind from the start. As you attempt to negotiate, your previous salary will become like a rotting albatross around your neck.
You were close though, the right way to do it is to say "I'm more interested in doing XXX at YYY than I a in the size of the initial offer." If they persist you can say "I'll consider any reasonable offer." If they are really persistent you can say "You are in a much better position to know how much I'm worth to you than I am."
After all the bluster about wanting to get credit, code, and/or compensation, I looked over the site for Lamson, Zed's MTA, and didn't see anything to the effect of "if you like this code but the distribution license is incompatible with your business goals, please contact me to discuss an alternate license with reasonable terms." It's not in the README, either. Anyone who can't use the GPL is probably just going to keep looking. After all, trying to convince someone to change their license is being a "gigantic jerk," right?
10 years ago the US Congress had the foresight to pass the DMCA which protects search engines, ISP caches, and similar technologies from this kind of nonsense. Too bad other nations haven't followed the USA's lead in this respect.
As any open source developer knows, what's needed is more ideas, suggestions, and questions. Later, once the discussion group has come to consensus, we'll write some code.
Even in cases where it is screamingly evident to absolutely anyone with two brain cells to rub together that more violence will never under any circumstances improve the situation, people on both sides keep doing it (I'm thinking of the Palestinian-Israeli situation, ON BOTH SIDES.)
Considering that Israel is on track to annex Jerusalem plus the best parts of the West Bank and its water supplies, I'd say that violence has improved their situation significantly.
Maybe these people should stop worrying about cats and direct their energies to the tens of millions of human beings suffering under brutal oppression, man-made famine, religious and gender persecution, torture, and unlawful detention.
Then again, what else should I expect from a culture that demonizes and imprisons someone for arranging dog fights while former leaders and government officials who ordered the torture of humans are given a platform for their disgusting rationalizations and don't even face a trial.
...except that nobody uses the Java sandbox. As a language for executing untrusted code Java is a huge failure. Flash and Javascript won in the browser. OTOH Java has been very successful in server side and corporate desktop apps where the sandbox features aren't used.
I'm so glad that PGP has been honored on this list. Let us take a moment to reflect what life would be like had Zimmerman not put his freedom on the line to write PGP.
1. Without PGP, almost everyone would send their emails in the clear. Today, cleartext email is the exception, not the rule.
2. Without PGP, emails, blog posts, and the like would be unauthenticated. Today, with the ubiquity of digital signatures and the public's expectation that they be valid, its virtually impossible to impersonate someone else or misquote them.
3. Without PGP, huge volumes of personal data aggregated onto easily transportable laptops and DVDs would be vulnerable to petty thieves. With the strong encryption tools in wide use today everyone can rest assured that their personal can't fall into the hands of some crackhead who broke the window of a bureaucrat's car.
Clearly, PGP has changed computing. No no, PGP has changed the WORLD!!
So what? The GP wanted to know why anyone would run OSX on unsupported hardware so I let him know. When your budget is $300 it doesn't matter how much better Apple's $1000 product is. I could compare a $300 laptop to a Touch but the Touch loses big, except in portability.
Uh, it's not $14k vs. $16k here, it's 14k vs $45k. The cheapest Apple laptop is over 3 times the price.
I'm not mad that Apple doesn't make a cheap laptop, just explaining why I run Mac OS X on a Dell despite the issues, which is what the GP wanted to know.
Cuz you can't get a 9" laptop with 2 gigs of ram, an 8 gig ssd, and wifi that runs OSX for $300 from Apple.
You can, however, get one from Dell and a number of other manufacturers. Let's compare the missing features between the $300 Dell Mini9 I gave my GF for her birthday with what Apple is offering:
Dell Mini 9: two finger scrolling (fixed in next DellEFI update)
Apple $300 netbook: has no features because it doesn't exist!
So it turns out that Dell's $300 laptop running Mac OSX offers a lot more functionality than Apple's $300 laptop. It's not even like Apple is offering a $400 or $500 laptop. No the cheapest laptop is $1000.
Unfair comparison? If my choices were limited to Apple laptops then I just couldn't get my GF a mac laptop for her birthday. She is quite grateful that the Dell Mini 9 is available. She said she would feel horrible if I spent over a $1000 on her present, plus it would be larger and heavier. She doesn't want a bigger and heavier laptop with "power" she doesn't need.
Conveniently, the Mac OS retail box comes with Apple stickers to cover up the Dell logo.
*found out they stopped making the mini 9 in the last month or two but my argument still holds
Covert channels like this are well known and have been part of the common criteria for decades. This is why systems handling classified data are usually physically isolated from others. When data is transferred into the classified system there no ACKs and the wires that would normally carry them aren't connected.
random enough for those mathematicians who work for Casinos across the world who use real die for a variety of Casino games and are willing to shell out hundreds of millions in winnings should the roller win.
Casino ensure their profit by paying less than the true odds. Outside of weighted dice introduced for fraud, the quality of the dice isn't that critical to the success of the casino.
I can assure you that in any commercial casino you will be asked to stop playing long before you reach 100 million in winnings.
The Supreme Court of the US already ruled on this in MGM vs. Grokster and Sony vs. Universal. Approving the app wouldn't expose Apple to secondary liability for infringement even if the app actually was a BT client (and not just a remote control.) Unless you have some theory of Apple inducing people to infringe that you're not telling us about.
Slashdot Mirror
In Google's calculus, and Google is notorious for their data driven, analytic culture, having a clean front page uncluttered by advertising continues to be worth more than any advertisements they could put there.
You're totally wrong, there are tons of ads on the Google search engine, just not on the landing page. That's because untargeted ads aren't worth much. Why clutter up the page (which turns off users) and waste impressions (which turns off advertisers) by showing irrelevant ads (which also turns off users), before you know what the user is searching for?
People are coming down on "Google" but I was under the impression that this was just some Google engineer's pet project ("20%" time) with maybe some help from his friends there. Lots of stuff coming out of Google is like this because of Google's very liberal policies. However, people always act like everything that comes out of the company is some strategic product driven by the highest levels.
Sayeth the SCOTUS:
That's from the Betamax case (emphasis mine,) and it was affirmed in Grokster. It doesn't matter if 90% of users are infringing. Notwithstanding evidence that the software creators intended their users to infringe or induced them to do so, it's enough that the software is merely capable of some significant noninfringing use. Significant here refers to the quality of the use, not the quantity.
They should be using rsync.
How much you're currently making at some other place is really none of their business. Putting out a number early on in the process like that is a terrible way to negotiate. If you're looking to make substantially more money at your next job then you're never going to get it if you reveal your current salary. At best your offer will be slightly above whatever number you put out, especially if they had a higher number in mind from the start. As you attempt to negotiate, your previous salary will become like a rotting albatross around your neck.
You were close though, the right way to do it is to say "I'm more interested in doing XXX at YYY than I a in the size of the initial offer." If they persist you can say "I'll consider any reasonable offer." If they are really persistent you can say "You are in a much better position to know how much I'm worth to you than I am."
This all comes from the Noel Smith-Wenkle Salary Negotiation Method
Sorry, the Onion beat you to it.
Games, movies, and songs aren't fungible.
After all the bluster about wanting to get credit, code, and/or compensation, I looked over the site for Lamson, Zed's MTA, and didn't see anything to the effect of "if you like this code but the distribution license is incompatible with your business goals, please contact me to discuss an alternate license with reasonable terms." It's not in the README, either. Anyone who can't use the GPL is probably just going to keep looking. After all, trying to convince someone to change their license is being a "gigantic jerk," right?
Not too smart, Zed.
10 years ago the US Congress had the foresight to pass the DMCA which protects search engines, ISP caches, and similar technologies from this kind of nonsense. Too bad other nations haven't followed the USA's lead in this respect.
Some interlocutor might learn the password to my account on the Greater Cleveland Beanie Baby Collectors web forum.
As any open source developer knows, what's needed is more ideas, suggestions, and questions. Later, once the discussion group has come to consensus, we'll write some code.
Considering that Israel is on track to annex Jerusalem plus the best parts of the West Bank and its water supplies, I'd say that violence has improved their situation significantly.
Maybe these people should stop worrying about cats and direct their energies to the tens of millions of human beings suffering under brutal oppression, man-made famine, religious and gender persecution, torture, and unlawful detention.
Then again, what else should I expect from a culture that demonizes and imprisons someone for arranging dog fights while former leaders and government officials who ordered the torture of humans are given a platform for their disgusting rationalizations and don't even face a trial.
You get tactile feedback on a touchscreen when you touch it.
...except that nobody uses the Java sandbox. As a language for executing untrusted code Java is a huge failure. Flash and Javascript won in the browser. OTOH Java has been very successful in server side and corporate desktop apps where the sandbox features aren't used.
I'm so glad that PGP has been honored on this list. Let us take a moment to reflect what life would be like had Zimmerman not put his freedom on the line to write PGP.
1. Without PGP, almost everyone would send their emails in the clear. Today, cleartext email is the exception, not the rule.
2. Without PGP, emails, blog posts, and the like would be unauthenticated. Today, with the ubiquity of digital signatures and the public's expectation that they be valid, its virtually impossible to impersonate someone else or misquote them.
3. Without PGP, huge volumes of personal data aggregated onto easily transportable laptops and DVDs would be vulnerable to petty thieves. With the strong encryption tools in wide use today everyone can rest assured that their personal can't fall into the hands of some crackhead who broke the window of a bureaucrat's car.
Clearly, PGP has changed computing. No no, PGP has changed the WORLD!!
So what? The GP wanted to know why anyone would run OSX on unsupported hardware so I let him know. When your budget is $300 it doesn't matter how much better Apple's $1000 product is. I could compare a $300 laptop to a Touch but the Touch loses big, except in portability.
No, the GP wanted to know why anyone would run OSX on unsupported hardware.
Uh, it's not $14k vs. $16k here, it's 14k vs $45k. The cheapest Apple laptop is over 3 times the price.
I'm not mad that Apple doesn't make a cheap laptop, just explaining why I run Mac OS X on a Dell despite the issues, which is what the GP wanted to know.
Cuz you can't get a 9" laptop with 2 gigs of ram, an 8 gig ssd, and wifi that runs OSX for $300 from Apple.
You can, however, get one from Dell and a number of other manufacturers. Let's compare the missing features between the $300 Dell Mini9 I gave my GF for her birthday with what Apple is offering:
Dell Mini 9: two finger scrolling (fixed in next DellEFI update)
Apple $300 netbook: has no features because it doesn't exist!
So it turns out that Dell's $300 laptop running Mac OSX offers a lot more functionality than Apple's $300 laptop. It's not even like Apple is offering a $400 or $500 laptop. No the cheapest laptop is $1000.
Unfair comparison? If my choices were limited to Apple laptops then I just couldn't get my GF a mac laptop for her birthday. She is quite grateful that the Dell Mini 9 is available. She said she would feel horrible if I spent over a $1000 on her present, plus it would be larger and heavier. She doesn't want a bigger and heavier laptop with "power" she doesn't need.
Conveniently, the Mac OS retail box comes with Apple stickers to cover up the Dell logo.
*found out they stopped making the mini 9 in the last month or two but my argument still holds
Covert channels like this are well known and have been part of the common criteria for decades. This is why systems handling classified data are usually physically isolated from others. When data is transferred into the classified system there no ACKs and the wires that would normally carry them aren't connected.
Casino ensure their profit by paying less than the true odds. Outside of weighted dice introduced for fraud, the quality of the dice isn't that critical to the success of the casino.
I can assure you that in any commercial casino you will be asked to stop playing long before you reach 100 million in winnings.
Send Google a 512(c) takedown letter. duh!
The Supreme Court of the US already ruled on this in MGM vs. Grokster and Sony vs. Universal. Approving the app wouldn't expose Apple to secondary liability for infringement even if the app actually was a BT client (and not just a remote control.) Unless you have some theory of Apple inducing people to infringe that you're not telling us about.