I'd say this hits the debate on the head. If he has a reproducable phenomena, where more energy is being produced than is expected, then that is something that needs to be investigated.
The articles on this all say that those who look at the experiments say that things are not being fudged. The next step should be independent verification. Someone needs to make the catalyst and verify that it causes the same phenomena, independent of this lab. If that is the case, then you can debate who has the correct theory as to why its happening, and perform experiments trying to prove that theory.
And to add another nail, the USB layer that was added to win95 was buggy and really only good for mice and keyboards. Many USB devices that were deployed for win95 had to completely replace the USB drivers, leading to incompatibilities.
Win98 is effectively the first windows OS that had a standard USB driver set which is why you wouldn't want to support anything before that with any new gadget. The support costs and potential problems are just not worth it.
Well, I'm guessing its for the same reason that the police are responsible for enforcing the laws on the books. The DoJ is part of the executive branch. When the president signs a bill into law (unless of course forced by a congressional override of a veto) he is placing the power of the executive branch behind it.
Now, I suppose it is _possible_ that a law might be poorly defended, but in most cases the lawyers representing the law wouldn't last long as DOJ lawyers if the didn't do what the establishment told them.
Actually the reason there is the delay is that they don't want to take their employees valuable time on data-lines or no-answers. The software is set up so that if a human voice is detected on the line, it will transfer to an person.
Corporations aren't necessarily as big of sheep as people. I can say for certain that at the very least an alternate product would be used for trade secrets. The kind of thing that is not authorized to be transmited over the internet.
Or, more likely, MS would produce a "corporate" product valued in the $500+ range that would do the same thing as MSOffice does today.
Yes, my isp also disabled all telnet access (though not ftp, which seemed interesting) to the machine... The problem with this, is that... since I still need access to my ISP from work, and work only has MS Telnet on it, I end up telnetting, via untrusted network to my home machine, and then ssh'ing from there.
Hopefully default OS distributions will start including some basic SSH terminal functionality at some point.
There are two sides to every coin. Regardless of whether any given person creates, there must be a constant tension between the rights of the creator and the rights of everyone else. To simply reject any person who has not "contributed" as having zero input does not help.
Its rather the same thing that annoys me about laws past using "protection of children" to be the reason for the law, and than blasting anyone who has an opinion on such law because "you don't have children, how would you know whats necessary." Of course I have an opinion.
In this case, we take those who stand directly to gain from said laws (extension of intellectual property, draconian anti-piracy laws, etc) with those who stand to lose from those laws (fair use, freedom to comment, and fairness in punishment when such laws are broken). Neither side is going to win. We'll never prevent all copying, nor should we strip all rights from the author. Your argument that because someone has never delt with an area that they are not allowed to decide for themselves what is proper is flawed. Given a full examination of the facts anyone has the right to form an opinion. How else does a representative goverment work... our Senators are not experts at everything they vote on.
Now before you ask, no you won't find me published, but I have made things that are protected under copyright. It is a useful law. But at some point it has to be understood that such material should revert to public domain.
If the features were pantented then theoretically they should not care, as the details of how to make a similar device should be registered with the USPTO...
True: Making money has to a priority of any business.
False: Making a profit has to be a priority of any business.
A business, just like any given individual, must taken in as much as they spend (simplified true).
A business, like a person, may decide what goals they have beyond a balanced budget.
How much a role that profit will play in those goles is purely up to the company for any privately owned companies. Publically traded companies, unfortunately, have the whole "fudiciary trust" thing going on. They are required to make profit a priority, but that is only one type of company.
Hey, its just a test for the slashbots out there to see if they are really smart enough to get to the real article, thus proving inteligence...
or something.
Specifically, because copywrite does not last forever. Things eventually must pass into the public domain. Imagine having to liscense any references to homer, greek heros, the legend of king aurthur, etc. from whoever had managed to legally secure the rights. Maybe someone who could legally claim that he was a direct descendant of Illiad.
Copywrite was specifically designed to be limited, and non-absolute. Disney, if its smart, can remain the one true source of Mickey Mouse. And through trademark they can still retain their identity as well... its just that everyone else can also use Mickey in their own creations, or make derivative works of whatever (the really old cartoons only, currently)
I guess I just don't buy the argument that just because they created and marketed him that they own him _forever._
Re:It's ironic as hell that a Mac user said it.
on
Is UNIX An OS?
·
· Score: 1
You'd say it to his face, but you post it anonymously. Cute.
And I'd hope it'd be self evident to almost anyone that a gui hides complexity. By showing you what items are important and providing specific help for each section of options.
The drawback is that the gui is limiting. Windows and MAC lack for me at least because they force the GUI on you.
Yes, you do declare variables, but without having to worry about memory management. int main() { string a; int *b; int i; a = "Hello"; b = ({ 1, 2 }); a += " World"; b += ({ 3, 4 }); write( a +"\n" ); while( i != sizeof( b ) ) write( b[i++] +"\n" ); return 0; } Basically most of the same functions as C with variable memory allocation handled for you. And that doesn't go into some of the more advanced variable types available.
Just wanted to indicate that this is indeed a evolved form of LPC. It was once named ùLPC several years ago. I guess they wanted to get beyond the perception of this being a "game" programming language. I've always enjoyed this as a scripting language, though, as I got my start coding on muds and with C programming.
This would be rather against open source ethics wouldn't it? If you give the right to one person to modify and redistribute you must give it to everyone. Even the evil empire.
Also, since this is a standard and not a piece of code. Since its open and freely distrubuted it'd be hard to prevent people from deviating from it (As the MPAA seems to be able to.) Unless of course the organization creating it held patents to the technology in some way.
I'm going to take this as a troll, and reply anyways.
Even though IE may be more advanced and may have won the war (i.e. sites may not try to be netscape compatible anymore) there is still a need to have a browser that will be ported to all platforms. I haven't seen much initiative on microsofts part to port to Linux yet... though this would be the time to do it to try and prevent more open source projects challenging their dominance.
So, no... so long as microsoft tries to limit its platforms its never won.
No, wrong. An election is perhaps the most direct way that the average citizen gets to interact with his government, but that is not the end-all of the political process.
Perhaps if all special interest groups suddenly decided that they no longer cared after an election what any given person did, or if businesses didn't make large contributions to keeping their favorite politicians employed in exchange for preferential voting treatment the system you advocate could work. But the truth is that no matter how good the person you vote into office, pressure is going to be invoked by other parties on that person to make certain decisions.
As a citizen you have a right (we'll leave the responsibility discussion out for the moment)to apply pressure for yourself. To abdicate that right is to allow the pursuit of profit to be the only voice our "representatives" hear. This would only increase the injustice already inherint in the system.
Slashdot Mirror
I'd say this hits the debate on the head. If he has a reproducable phenomena, where more energy is being produced than is expected, then that is something that needs to be investigated.
The articles on this all say that those who look at the experiments say that things are not being fudged. The next step should be independent verification. Someone needs to make the catalyst and verify that it causes the same phenomena, independent of this lab. If that is the case, then you can debate who has the correct theory as to why its happening, and perform experiments trying to prove that theory.
And to add another nail, the USB layer that was added to win95 was buggy and really only good for mice and keyboards. Many USB devices that were deployed for win95 had to completely replace the USB drivers, leading to incompatibilities.
Win98 is effectively the first windows OS that had a standard USB driver set which is why you wouldn't want to support anything before that with any new gadget. The support costs and potential problems are just not worth it.
Well, I'm guessing its for the same reason that the police are responsible for enforcing the laws on the books. The DoJ is part of the executive branch. When the president signs a bill into law (unless of course forced by a congressional override of a veto) he is placing the power of the executive branch behind it.
Now, I suppose it is _possible_ that a law might be poorly defended, but in most cases the lawyers representing the law wouldn't last long as DOJ lawyers if the didn't do what the establishment told them.
Actually the reason there is the delay is that they don't want to take their employees valuable time on data-lines or no-answers. The software is set up so that if a human voice is detected on the line, it will transfer to an person.
Corporations aren't necessarily as big of sheep as people. I can say for certain that at the very least an alternate product would be used for trade secrets. The kind of thing that is not authorized to be transmited over the internet.
Or, more likely, MS would produce a "corporate" product valued in the $500+ range that would do the same thing as MSOffice does today.
Yes, my isp also disabled all telnet access (though not ftp, which seemed interesting) to the machine... The problem with this, is that... since I still need access to my ISP from work, and work only has MS Telnet on it, I end up telnetting, via untrusted network to my home machine, and then ssh'ing from there.
Hopefully default OS distributions will start including some basic SSH terminal functionality at some point.
There are two sides to every coin. Regardless of whether any given person creates, there must be a constant tension between the rights of the creator and the rights of everyone else. To simply reject any person who has not "contributed" as having zero input does not help.
Its rather the same thing that annoys me about laws past using "protection of children" to be the reason for the law, and than blasting anyone who has an opinion on such law because "you don't have children, how would you know whats necessary." Of course I have an opinion.
In this case, we take those who stand directly to gain from said laws (extension of intellectual property, draconian anti-piracy laws, etc) with those who stand to lose from those laws (fair use, freedom to comment, and fairness in punishment when such laws are broken). Neither side is going to win. We'll never prevent all copying, nor should we strip all rights from the author. Your argument that because someone has never delt with an area that they are not allowed to decide for themselves what is proper is flawed. Given a full examination of the facts anyone has the right to form an opinion. How else does a representative goverment work... our Senators are not experts at everything they vote on.
Now before you ask, no you won't find me published, but I have made things that are protected under copyright. It is a useful law. But at some point it has to be understood that such material should revert to public domain.
If the features were pantented then theoretically they should not care, as the details of how to make a similar device should be registered with the USPTO...
True: Making money has to a priority of any business.
False: Making a profit has to be a priority of any business.
A business, just like any given individual, must taken in as much as they spend (simplified true). A business, like a person, may decide what goals they have beyond a balanced budget.
How much a role that profit will play in those goles is purely up to the company for any privately owned companies. Publically traded companies, unfortunately, have the whole "fudiciary trust" thing going on. They are required to make profit a priority, but that is only one type of company.
Share and Enjoy.
Hey, its just a test for the slashbots out there to see if they are really smart enough to get to the real article, thus proving inteligence... or something.
Specifically, because copywrite does not last forever. Things eventually must pass into the public domain. Imagine having to liscense any references to homer, greek heros, the legend of king aurthur, etc. from whoever had managed to legally secure the rights. Maybe someone who could legally claim that he was a direct descendant of Illiad.
Copywrite was specifically designed to be limited, and non-absolute. Disney, if its smart, can remain the one true source of Mickey Mouse. And through trademark they can still retain their identity as well... its just that everyone else can also use Mickey in their own creations, or make derivative works of whatever (the really old cartoons only, currently)
I guess I just don't buy the argument that just because they created and marketed him that they own him _forever._
You'd say it to his face, but you post it anonymously. Cute. And I'd hope it'd be self evident to almost anyone that a gui hides complexity. By showing you what items are important and providing specific help for each section of options. The drawback is that the gui is limiting. Windows and MAC lack for me at least because they force the GUI on you.
Yes, you do declare variables, but without having to worry about memory management. int main() { string a; int *b; int i; a = "Hello"; b = ({ 1, 2 }); a += " World"; b += ({ 3, 4 }); write( a +"\n" ); while( i != sizeof( b ) ) write( b[i++] +"\n" ); return 0; } Basically most of the same functions as C with variable memory allocation handled for you. And that doesn't go into some of the more advanced variable types available.
Just wanted to indicate that this is indeed a evolved form of LPC. It was once named ùLPC several years ago. I guess they wanted to get beyond the perception of this being a "game" programming language. I've always enjoyed this as a scripting language, though, as I got my start coding on muds and with C programming.
Well, if there is a trial. The article seemed to indicate that the main person in question settled.
This would be rather against open source ethics wouldn't it? If you give the right to one person to modify and redistribute you must give it to everyone. Even the evil empire.
Also, since this is a standard and not a piece of code. Since its open and freely distrubuted it'd be hard to prevent people from deviating from it (As the MPAA seems to be able to.) Unless of course the organization creating it held patents to the technology in some way.
C:\WINDOWS>copy winhelp.exe wh
1 file(s) copied
C:\WINDOWS>wh
Bad command or file name
C:\WINDOWS>start wh
No application is associated with the specified file. Create an association by using the Explorer.
Now I think there may be a way to associate files with no extension, which could be interesting.
Well, it may be in a book, but I can at least pass on that "Slartibartfast" was a name chosen to annoy his typist.
Don't know about whales or Zaphod.
I'm going to take this as a troll, and reply anyways.
Even though IE may be more advanced and may have won the war (i.e. sites may not try to be netscape compatible anymore) there is still a need to have a browser that will be ported to all platforms. I haven't seen much initiative on microsofts part to port to Linux yet... though this would be the time to do it to try and prevent more open source projects challenging their dominance.
So, no... so long as microsoft tries to limit its platforms its never won.
No, wrong.
An election is perhaps the most direct way that the average citizen gets to interact with his government, but that is not the end-all of the political process.
Perhaps if all special interest groups suddenly decided that they no longer cared after an election what any given person did, or if businesses didn't make large contributions to keeping their favorite politicians employed in exchange for preferential voting treatment the system you advocate could work. But the truth is that no matter how good the person you vote into office, pressure is going to be invoked by other parties on that person to make certain decisions.
As a citizen you have a right (we'll leave the responsibility discussion out for the moment)to apply pressure for yourself. To abdicate that right is to allow the pursuit of profit to be the only voice our "representatives" hear. This would only increase the injustice already inherint in the system.
Should that be "Get a life -or- get a laserdisc player?" I personally will just wait for him to release it in DVD and skip VHS.