They work when civilization collapses and they're found centuries later in a cave.
I'm buying the book so I can read it, not so future archaeologists can.
There is of course, a way to make a normal book stop working when the availability of its content becomes a problem. It's called fire. It's generally bad form to burn a paper book. Why exactly is it socially acceptable to DRM a book again?
Not the same thing. Book burning is used by dictators and fanatics to censor the content of books they don't like. They don't want you to read the book at all.
Publishers want to use DRM to keep extorting money out of you. They don't care what the book says, as long as you pay for the privilege of reading it.
The closest we've come to an ebook-burning so far is the mechanism that allowed Amazon to yank illegitimately sold copies of 1984 from users' Kindles.
Yes, it's entirely Linux's fault that a third party chose not to port to it.
The problem has nothing to do with technical capability, just the same old cycle of few quality commercial applications for Linux = little demand for Linux and Linux ports.
Chrome is extremely sandboxed. Scripts running in Chrome don't have permission to randomly alter files, install software, etc. like ActiveX did.
Chrome extensions are even limited in the ability to alter their own files. Or at least that's seems to be the reason NotScripts needs you to edit one of its files by hand after you install it.
I already have an OS. It plays movies, games, and anything else I throw at it. I don't need to run a 2nd OS on top of it to replicate the functions of the original.
ChromeOS. This will allow it to have real applications. Correct me if I'm wrong, but doesn't Native Client in Chromium imply that a ChromeOS app can be written once and run on any platform with Chromium? The ability to support 4 or 5 platforms, without any effort put into porting...certainly not something to be dismissed lightly.
Biology is inconsistent. The patients with 5% improvement are probably the ones whose bodies don't heal well after burns and don't accept the graft very well. The 20% do heal burns well and readily accepted the graft.
Within the first 20 seconds of the London Stock Exchange's new matching engine going live on Monday, price data vendors began displaying incorrect prices, blank prices and wrong trading volumes, according to Computerworld UK sources.
Surely they would have run test data before letting it go live. Maybe even feed it the actual data and simply not publish its results.
I don't know if anyone's complained about it, but they're making their netbook interface Unity the default desktop. It was still very much a beta when I was trying it out last year, but it shows some promise. Needs a real menu, if you ask me.
The new version has the latest bind, php 5.3, etc. Seems really current to me.
For servers, sure. The desktop? Some applications, like Firefox, may technically be on the most recent stable release, but it will be over a year out of date–and remember, new FF release cycle after 4 gets comes out–by the time Debian 7 rolls around. And last I checked they still haven't put a beta of 4.0 in sid yet.
You can't just count packages and draw conclusions from counts. Some of the packages haven't been updated in years. Some are only used by like five users on the planet. Some are so buggy they won't even run.
Maybe, but if a Debian package out of date, uncommon, or unusably buggy, then I expect that Ubuntu would not import it or pull from the upstream project. You know, the packages the summary is talking about.
Fewer features in each major release should mean more time spent fixing bugs.
Which, one might argue, makes them point releases instead of major releases. If 5 is only adding a few features from 4, and fixing bugs, then why isn't it 4.1?
That's the route the Linux kernel has gone. End result: 20 years old and they've been on 2.6.x for over a third of that. It's improved by leaps and bounds, but you wouldn't know it by looking at the version numbers.
One of the side effects of smaller release cycles will be less major changes in a release. You'll have to test more often, but most the time it'll be just to confirm that yep, it acts just like last month's version.
And Firefox4.0 also updates silently in the background (check the About tab right after opening)
The whole point of standards is to ensure that one can safely state that $FOO will work on both System_A and System_B without knowing anything about them except that they support the standard. If we rely on system codecs then users can't be sure that the site they're visiting provides content in a codec available on their platform. And the content provider needs to have 2-4 versions of every video if they're going to be reasonable certain that the website will work with a random visitor.
If we require that a certain format to be supported in order for it to be standard-compliant, then both content providers and users can be sure that $STANDARD_COMPLIANT_WEBSITE works with $STANDARD_COMPLIANT_SYSTEM
Slashdot Mirror
They work when civilization collapses and they're found centuries later in a cave.
I'm buying the book so I can read it, not so future archaeologists can.
There is of course, a way to make a normal book stop working when the availability of its content becomes a problem. It's called fire. It's generally bad form to burn a paper book. Why exactly is it socially acceptable to DRM a book again?
Not the same thing. Book burning is used by dictators and fanatics to censor the content of books they don't like. They don't want you to read the book at all.
Publishers want to use DRM to keep extorting money out of you. They don't care what the book says, as long as you pay for the privilege of reading it.
The closest we've come to an ebook-burning so far is the mechanism that allowed Amazon to yank illegitimately sold copies of 1984 from users' Kindles.
Yes, it's entirely Linux's fault that a third party chose not to port to it. The problem has nothing to do with technical capability, just the same old cycle of few quality commercial applications for Linux = little demand for Linux and Linux ports.
I guess California must have different actual weather than their tourist bureau promotes.
In the summertime, you don't want anything to do with a metal object that large that's been sitting outside all day.
Chrome is extremely sandboxed. Scripts running in Chrome don't have permission to randomly alter files, install software, etc. like ActiveX did.
Chrome extensions are even limited in the ability to alter their own files. Or at least that's seems to be the reason NotScripts needs you to edit one of its files by hand after you install it.
I already have an OS. It plays movies, games, and anything else I throw at it. I don't need to run a 2nd OS on top of it to replicate the functions of the original.
ChromeOS. This will allow it to have real applications. Correct me if I'm wrong, but doesn't Native Client in Chromium imply that a ChromeOS app can be written once and run on any platform with Chromium? The ability to support 4 or 5 platforms, without any effort put into porting...certainly not something to be dismissed lightly.
Biology is inconsistent. The patients with 5% improvement are probably the ones whose bodies don't heal well after burns and don't accept the graft very well. The 20% do heal burns well and readily accepted the graft.
As the grafting process becomes more seamless, I wonder if it might be put to other uses, like tattoo removal. Or even applying tattoos.
Within the first 20 seconds of the London Stock Exchange's new matching engine going live on Monday, price data vendors began displaying incorrect prices, blank prices and wrong trading volumes, according to Computerworld UK sources.
Surely they would have run test data before letting it go live. Maybe even feed it the actual data and simply not publish its results.
I don't know if anyone's complained about it, but they're making their netbook interface Unity the default desktop. It was still very much a beta when I was trying it out last year, but it shows some promise. Needs a real menu, if you ask me.
I've got to try that. I love the hotkeys, but the recent redesign hides all child comments when the current comment is collapsed.
Sims with Facebook?
Displacing "Your cat" for first place in "Most pathetic things to get a Facebook profile": Video game people.
Yes, but not for video streaming.
The new version has the latest bind, php 5.3, etc. Seems really current to me.
For servers, sure. The desktop? Some applications, like Firefox, may technically be on the most recent stable release, but it will be over a year out of date–and remember, new FF release cycle after 4 gets comes out–by the time Debian 7 rolls around. And last I checked they still haven't put a beta of 4.0 in sid yet.
You can't just count packages and draw conclusions from counts. Some of the packages haven't been updated in years. Some are only used by like five users on the planet. Some are so buggy they won't even run.
Maybe, but if a Debian package out of date, uncommon, or unusably buggy, then I expect that Ubuntu would not import it or pull from the upstream project. You know, the packages the summary is talking about.
Debian doesn't get much credit, and its become trendy for industry pundits to claim it's become irrelevant.
News to me. Who's calling it irrelevant?
Special guest star: Matt Damon as Jason Bourne.
"Church of Scientology" often gets abbreviated as "CoS"
Which, one might argue, makes them point releases instead of major releases. If 5 is only adding a few features from 4, and fixing bugs, then why isn't it 4.1?
That's the route the Linux kernel has gone. End result: 20 years old and they've been on 2.6.x for over a third of that. It's improved by leaps and bounds, but you wouldn't know it by looking at the version numbers.
This change in release cycles means that they won't be doing any 4.x.x releases. What will they update to, if not 5, 6, 7, etc?
One of the side effects of smaller release cycles will be less major changes in a release. You'll have to test more often, but most the time it'll be just to confirm that yep, it acts just like last month's version. And Firefox4.0 also updates silently in the background (check the About tab right after opening)
That's...not bacon.
Your ideas are intriguing to me and I wish to subscribe to your newsletter.
The whole point of standards is to ensure that one can safely state that $FOO will work on both System_A and System_B without knowing anything about them except that they support the standard. If we rely on system codecs then users can't be sure that the site they're visiting provides content in a codec available on their platform. And the content provider needs to have 2-4 versions of every video if they're going to be reasonable certain that the website will work with a random visitor.
If we require that a certain format to be supported in order for it to be standard-compliant, then both content providers and users can be sure that $STANDARD_COMPLIANT_WEBSITE works with $STANDARD_COMPLIANT_SYSTEM
netcat
Bing principal Scott Prevost...
Considering Slashdot's other Bing story today, I can't say I'm sad to see him go.