How can you be so ignorant. I'm not saying companies can't innovate, or that they all have to write the same OS, all I'm saying is they make protocols using the existing RFC mechanism or something like it.
--
I don't see we can possibly say that all inter-machine communications protocols must be open and documented, or that they use the RFC mechanism. Programmers around the world are creating thousands of new protocols every day. How can we possibly do RFCs for all of them? How can we gather all of that documentation into some way that everyone can access it?
I believe RMS has stated that dynamic linking is the equivalent of static linking, for purposes of the GPL. So a GPL'd program cannot legally be distributed in binary form, linked to Qt.
I don't like this policy either, but I can see the point. Someone who wants to put proprietary modifications into a GPL'd application could simply "refactor" the application into a free part and a proprietary library.
You'll need some sort of "dictionary" that gives a list of words along with the number of syllables for each one. Your program would look up all the RDF's words in that dictionary.
There are a few games out there where you write programs for robots or tanks and try to destroy the opponents. Kids might like that sort of thing (I did).
And it's cheaper and safer than programming real-world destructo-bots.
Apple and IBM's official position is that JavaBeans is the "successor" to OpenDoc.
Both KDE and Gnome have their own component models under development. KDE (actually, KOffice) started out with a CORBA-based model, but last I heard they have abandoned that in favor of a more ActiveX-like model.
The OpenDoc specification was adopted by the OMG (the CORBA folks), and I think it can be downloaded from www.omg.org.
I don't think we have to say that documentation should be either printed or or online, but not both. Given that choice, I'd go for online because then I could print them if necessary.
But there's no good reason companies can't provide online docs along with the printed docs. They generally don't take up much space on a CD. And there are tools out there that make it easy to create documentation for both online and printed formats.
Don't worry. Every MtvC I've ever seen can be destroyed by simply introducing a logical contradiction. For example, Mulder could have said "Scully always tells the truth", and then Scully could have said "I am lying", and the MtvC would have immediately exploded.
I'm surprised the FBI doesn't teach basic anti-computer self-defense techniques like this at their academy.
The first Vonnegut novel I read was "Cat's Cradle", and I loved it. I'd consider it to be SF. It has interesting ideas about the natures of science and religion.
Why is it that Slashdotters go ballistic over every minor technical GPL violation, but encourage breaking commercial license agreements. Rather than "us vs. them" or "little guy vs. big guy", how about looking at "right vs. wrong".
If you don't like the conditions attached to DVDs, then don't buy them.
Maybe consciousness is an illusion. To believe otherwise is, at this point, a matter of faith.
I don't think this is true. It's something like "I think, therefore I am.": I am conscious of my own existence, therefore I possess consciousness. Even if life is indeed an illusion, I know that my consciousness exists in some form.
I'd probably disagree with most of this book. There's no reason that even a Turing machine couldn't simulate a problem solving device as complex as the human brain, provided you'd figured out all of the physiological properties that contribute to intelligence.
See Roger Penrose's The Emperor's New Mind for a counterargument.
The distinctions between.com,.org,.net, etc. are now so blurred that there is really no point in trying to continue them. Even techies aren't following the rules--just look at slashdot.org and freshmeat.net as examples.
I disagree that educating the general public is important. They just want to know what to type into their browser window; they don't care about the hierarchy or ICANN. It's not because they're stupid or lazy. It's because they have better things to do with their time than figure out how computers work.
I don't care how the phone works. I just want to know which buttons to push to talk to my friends and family. Computers should be the same way.
I have a patent pending on the state of arousal that results from looking at porn on the Internet. This was the result of years of research on my part.
Slashdot Mirror
--
How can you be so ignorant. I'm not saying companies can't innovate, or that they all have to write the same OS, all I'm saying is they make protocols using the existing RFC mechanism or something like it.
--
I don't see we can possibly say that all inter-machine communications protocols must be open and documented, or that they use the RFC mechanism. Programmers around the world are creating thousands of new protocols every day. How can we possibly do RFCs for all of them? How can we gather all of that documentation into some way that everyone can access it?
I don't like this policy either, but I can see the point. Someone who wants to put proprietary modifications into a GPL'd application could simply "refactor" the application into a free part and a proprietary library.
Link: http://www.jabber.org
You'll need some sort of "dictionary" that gives a list of words along with the number of syllables for each one. Your program would look up all the RDF's words in that dictionary.
And it's cheaper and safer than programming real-world destructo-bots.
Apple and IBM's official position is that JavaBeans is the "successor" to OpenDoc.
Both KDE and Gnome have their own component models under development. KDE (actually, KOffice) started out with a CORBA-based model, but last I heard they have abandoned that in favor of a more ActiveX-like model.
The OpenDoc specification was adopted by the OMG (the CORBA folks), and I think it can be downloaded from www.omg.org.
But there's no good reason companies can't provide online docs along with the printed docs. They generally don't take up much space on a CD. And there are tools out there that make it easy to create documentation for both online and printed formats.
I'm surprised the FBI doesn't teach basic anti-computer self-defense techniques like this at their academy.
The first Vonnegut novel I read was "Cat's Cradle", and I loved it. I'd consider it to be SF. It has interesting ideas about the natures of science and religion.
"Harrison Bergeron" is great too.
Why is it that Slashdotters go ballistic over every minor technical GPL violation, but encourage breaking commercial license agreements. Rather than "us vs. them" or "little guy vs. big guy", how about looking at "right vs. wrong".
If you don't like the conditions attached to DVDs, then don't buy them.
I don't think this is true. It's something like "I think, therefore I am.": I am conscious of my own existence, therefore I possess consciousness. Even if life is indeed an illusion, I know that my consciousness exists in some form.
-- Kris
See Roger Penrose's The Emperor's New Mind for a counterargument.
-- Kris
I disagree that educating the general public is important. They just want to know what to type into their browser window; they don't care about the hierarchy or ICANN. It's not because they're stupid or lazy. It's because they have better things to do with their time than figure out how computers work.
I don't care how the phone works. I just want to know which buttons to push to talk to my friends and family. Computers should be the same way.
Start sending those licensing fees.
BTW, Big Clock does this for every New Year, not just 2000.