Well, that all may have applied to automatics 40 years ago, or whenever you last drove one, but have you tried driving one made in the last 10 years? When pulling into traffic, they'll upshift later if you press the accelerator pedal down more. In fact, if you floor the accelerator, they won't upshift until the engine hits the redline. Personally, I don't pull into traffic if the conditions are such that I need to get from 0 to 60 in 8 seconds, but maybe that's just me.
Never had problems going up steep hills either.
But you just go ahead and keep knocking automatic transmissions based on outdated information. I'm sure technology hasn't advanced at all in the past few decades.
P.S. I know how to drive a stick, and do think they're more fun to drive than an auto. However, I do not suffer from the delusion that sticks are actually better for general use.
Why do you feel the need to artificially limit the discussion to "wire transfers"? While it's true that all US banks that I know of do charge fairly hefty fees for wire transfers ($10 and up), a wire transfer isn't the only way to electronically send money to someone.
FYI, Discover Bank lets me do an ACH transfer to anyone (given their bank routing number and account number) for free. Funds will be available to the recipient in about 3 business days. Now if 3 days is too long, domestic wire transfers cost $20, and funds will be available the same day. However, for non-emergency uses, 3 days is no problem, and I've never had to make a wire transfer.
AT&T GoPhone. A ludicrous $0.01/KB if you don't buy a block of data, but you can buy a 100MB block that lasts up to 30 days for $19.99 (and if you buy another block of data before the 30 days is up, any unused amount from your previous block will roll over), as well as a 1MB block for $4.99. I use it with my unlocked Nokia E71, and it works great. While 100MB isn't much, I don't use my phone's data connection as if it were my primary internet connection; 100MB typically lasts me 2 or 3 months.
Agreed--I'd like to see some real evidence too (Chinese language is fine). As far as I can tell, this is the story: CNNIC does have a "Chinese Language Surfing" product, which enables the use of Chinese domain names, among other things. (ICANN approved non-ASCII ccTLDs late last year, but the Chinese have been using browser plugins and the like to get the same effect for years. This probably isn't the best article about it, but it was what came up when I tried to search for an article that explained it: China's New Domain Names: Lost in Translation.)
AFAICT, "Chinese Language Surfing" isn't malware--it does what it says it does. However, it does seem unusually protective of itself once installed--but not to the point that the uninstaller doesn't work. Also, while CNNIC doesn't endorse this, apparently "Chinese Language Surfing" gets automatically installed (without user consent) by other programs. This has led to some antimalware-software vendors listing it as malware. E.g., MS calls it BrowserModifier:Win32/CNNIC, and has this to say about it:
BrowserModifier:Win32/CNNIC enables Chinese keyword searching in Internet Explorer and adds support for other applications to use Chinese domain names that registered with CNNIC (China Internet Network Information Center). This program is often installed as part of a shareware or freeware program, with or without user consent. BrowserModifier:Win32/CNNIC also contains a kernel driver that protects its files and registry settings from being modified or deleted. The program also includes automatic self-update functionality.
FWIW, I tried installing CNNIC's product in a virtual machine while running Sysinternals' ProcMon, and didn't spot anything super-suspicious--it did install a driver as MS said, which did seem excessive. And it did add a menu item to IE, but it didn't cause me to get any more popup ads. Seemed well-behaved, as far as I could tell (not that I spent much time with it). I then uninstalled it, and it seemed to remove itself cleanly, including the driver.
Personally, I would definitely be annoyed if it got installed without my consent, but the program itself does not meet my definition of "malware". Now if anyone has evidence that it's secretly nefarious and does more than what it claims to, please post the details.
I'm still running 64-bit XP (although I'm thinking of upgrading to 7), and I didn't have any problems with finding drivers for my peripherals. nVidia graphics card, LSI SCSI, Areca RAID, Logitech webcam, Canon flatbed scanner, Fujitsu Scansnap document scanner, DViCo ATSC tuner--all work fine. (Printer works fine too, although it's a network printer that supports PostScript and PCL, so it'd work with anything.)
While drivers may have been hard to find back when 64-bit XP was first released, after Vista came out, manufacturers started making 64-bit drivers (and for most devices, Vista 64 drivers work for XP 64).
Wow, you're quite the douche. People do not experience a reduction in their quality of life with one kidney. All the things you mention do impact quality of life.
And yes, I'd certainly donate a kidney to a loved one if they needed it.
I assure you we won't be changing that option [tab vs spaces] any time soon:-)
So they solicited comments on a blog that no one reads and immediately say they aren't planning to change anything when questioned. After saying they wouldn't be changing the option, no one complained. Wow, what due diligence.
He didn't say that they weren't planning to change anything. He said that they weren't planning on changing "that option" (tabs vs. spaces). And they haven't--VS still lets you choose whether you want to indent with tabs or with spaces. The change is that if you indent with tabs, the indent must always be one tab, regardless of how many columns each tabstop is. Hardly seems like a onerous limitation to me.
So some of the comments on the boingboing post, e.g., this one, have had their vowels removed and a "Moderator note" added, with a link to an article about "disemvoweling". The article says, "comments on blogs and in other online forums can be incredibly annoying, not to mention hate-filled and obscene. How can moderators walk the line between unregulated anarchy and oppressive censorship? Some have begun discouraging problem commenters by simply removing the vowels from their posts, a process known as disemvoweling. The offending message is rendered less obnoxious, but it's still possible for other readers to decipher it — f thy rlly wnt t."
So let's try to decipher one of the disemvoweled comments:
It's my observation that most of these cases begin with a person who becomes belligerent when asked to do something he doesn't want to do (get out of the car, step away from the car, etc.) These officers may very well have overstepped their bounds, but I doubt very seriously that Watts is completely innocent.
I suspect the crux of the matter lies (no pun intended) in this sentence: "When Peter got out of the car and questioned the nature of the search, the gang of border guards subjected him to a beating..."
So he innocently said, "Why are you searching my car?" Then they commenced to beating him. Sure.
So that is what the moderators consider "offensive" enough that they think it should be censored? I looked a few more of the censored comments, and they were of a similar vein--suggesting that we don't know the whole story, but doing so politely. Sure is nice to see dissenting viewpoints being suppressed!
Artifex is the name of the company that owns Ghostscript, which is a Postscript interperter. Artifex offers Ghostscript under the GPL and a proprietary commercial license.
However, this lawsuit has nothing to do with Ghostscript, but muPDF, which is a PDF library written by Artifex, also offered under the GPL and a proprietary commercial license. Apparently, Palm has not purchased a commercial license to use muPDF, which means they need to abide by the terms of the GPL. However, they haven't provided the source to their PDF viewer app; all they've done is provide the source to the version of muPDF that they're using in their app, but that's not enough--muPDF is GPLed, not LGPLed.
That looks like the source to the muPDF rendering engine, not the source to the Pre's PDF viewer app. "Artifex alleges that Palm has copied Artifex's PDF rendering engine, called muPDF, and integrated it into the Palm Pre's PDF viewer application without the proper licensing conditions."
They almost certainly would. The prosecutor just has to make it clear that the only relevant fact is that he did download the images. It's completely irrelevant to his guilt or innocence that he immediately deleted the images. These laws leave absolutely no wiggle room with regards to intent.
Did you even read the indictment? The charge is that he "did knowingly receive and distribute... [a visual depiction that] involved a minor engaging in sexually explicit conduct" (my emphasis). So it is in fact relevant whether he knew that he was download CP.
No, you're not automatically obligated to do any such thing. What happens is that you may be infringing on the copyrights on the GPL'd code, so it's up to the copyright holders to decide what to do: ignore it, negotiate a (presumably non-GPL) license agreement with you, or take you to court. And if the latter, the judge will decide what the punishment should be--most likely it'll be "stop distributing the software and pay the copyright holder $$$$$". It's unlikely that the punishment would be "publish the source code to your app that used GPLed code."
Yes you are obligated to do such a thing, and if you don't comply you can be dragged to court where you could be sentenced to pay for copyright infringement.
If one of the options is to not comply and pay for copyright infringement, how is that being obligated to release the source code? As I said, you're not obligated to release the source code. You're only obligated to do that if you want to license the code under the GPL--that text you quoted is from the GPL. However, you're not obligated to license the code under the GPL: you can ask the copyright holder to license it to you under some other license, or you can violate the GPL and accept the punishment for that. Depending on how badly you want to prevent your code from being open-sourced, and how much money you have, paying some money may be a very reasonable option.
And no it's not enough to pull the application, if you've distributed the binary and you've used GPL code you're obligated to release that code.
No, you're not automatically obligated to do any such thing. What happens is that you may be infringing on the copyrights on the GPL'd code, so it's up to the copyright holders to decide what to do: ignore it, negotiate a (presumably non-GPL) license agreement with you, or take you to court. And if the latter, the judge will decide what the punishment should be--most likely it'll be "stop distributing the software and pay the copyright holder $$$$$". It's unlikely that the punishment would be "publish the source code to your app that used GPLed code."
In the US, POTS calls are digitized at the central office at an 8kHz sampling rate, 8-bit mu-law samples. With the exception of mu-law vs. a-law, that's the same as what's used in, e.g., Europe, and the difference has no noticeable effect on sound quality--either way, it's still bandlimited to 4kHz (actually 3.6kHz). The callers on radio call-in shows in other countries don't sound any better than the ones in the US. And while doing the ADC at the phone is certainly nice, it doesn't have any significant effect on sound quality (unless you have an actual fault in the phone line that's introducing hum or static, in which case ISDN wouldn't work either). And yes, I had an ISDN line and ISDN phone back in the late '90s to early '00s and am very familiar with how a end-to-end digital call with no compression sounds. I liked it for its call control features (buttons to answer different lines, conference, hold, etc...), not because the sound quality was any better.
I'm not sure which part of that you're having difficulty with. The two statements are independent--"2/3 as many units" refers to the current sales figures. "Catching up" refers to the direction of change of those figures: they're increasing.
For example: if I sold an average of 6 apples a day and 9 oranges a day last week, and I sold an average of 8 apples a day and 9 oranges a day this week, I could say that I sold 2/3 as many apples as oranges last week, but that apple sales were catching up to the orange sales.
I haven't seen any interpreted code yet... the excerpt posted appears to be a database table definition. I hope you're not suggesting that ballot definitions can't be stored in a database table.
There's an analysis of Bill Maher's anti-medicine stance on the Science-Based Medicine blog. It points out how he's considered an informed "skeptic" due to his anti-religious views, despite him embracing medical quackery.
Slashdot Mirror
Perhaps this video will give you more info on SkyTel and pagers.
So, first they expect to sell 700k on the first day: http://business-news.thestreet.com/technology-news/2010/04/04/a/606016821-analyst-apple-sold-600-700-thousand/
I see reading comprehension isn't your strong suit.
Well, that all may have applied to automatics 40 years ago, or whenever you last drove one, but have you tried driving one made in the last 10 years? When pulling into traffic, they'll upshift later if you press the accelerator pedal down more. In fact, if you floor the accelerator, they won't upshift until the engine hits the redline. Personally, I don't pull into traffic if the conditions are such that I need to get from 0 to 60 in 8 seconds, but maybe that's just me.
Never had problems going up steep hills either.
But you just go ahead and keep knocking automatic transmissions based on outdated information. I'm sure technology hasn't advanced at all in the past few decades.
P.S. I know how to drive a stick, and do think they're more fun to drive than an auto. However, I do not suffer from the delusion that sticks are actually better for general use.
Why do you feel the need to artificially limit the discussion to "wire transfers"? While it's true that all US banks that I know of do charge fairly hefty fees for wire transfers ($10 and up), a wire transfer isn't the only way to electronically send money to someone.
FYI, Discover Bank lets me do an ACH transfer to anyone (given their bank routing number and account number) for free. Funds will be available to the recipient in about 3 business days. Now if 3 days is too long, domestic wire transfers cost $20, and funds will be available the same day. However, for non-emergency uses, 3 days is no problem, and I've never had to make a wire transfer.
No, it's quite obvious that you're the one with the misunderstanding.
Que the Anti Adobe Activists in 3... 2...
[inverted?]Que?
Prepay doesn't have data.
AT&T GoPhone. A ludicrous $0.01/KB if you don't buy a block of data, but you can buy a 100MB block that lasts up to 30 days for $19.99 (and if you buy another block of data before the 30 days is up, any unused amount from your previous block will roll over), as well as a 1MB block for $4.99. I use it with my unlocked Nokia E71, and it works great. While 100MB isn't much, I don't use my phone's data connection as if it were my primary internet connection; 100MB typically lasts me 2 or 3 months.
Just send every single tax filing both ways. The right one gets filed, and wrong one gets rejected. Twice the work for the government.
Or just fax it correctly in the first place--it's not difficult. Face down, nine-edge first.
Agreed--I'd like to see some real evidence too (Chinese language is fine). As far as I can tell, this is the story: CNNIC does have a "Chinese Language Surfing" product, which enables the use of Chinese domain names, among other things. (ICANN approved non-ASCII ccTLDs late last year, but the Chinese have been using browser plugins and the like to get the same effect for years. This probably isn't the best article about it, but it was what came up when I tried to search for an article that explained it: China's New Domain Names: Lost in Translation.)
AFAICT, "Chinese Language Surfing" isn't malware--it does what it says it does. However, it does seem unusually protective of itself once installed--but not to the point that the uninstaller doesn't work. Also, while CNNIC doesn't endorse this, apparently "Chinese Language Surfing" gets automatically installed (without user consent) by other programs. This has led to some antimalware-software vendors listing it as malware. E.g., MS calls it BrowserModifier:Win32/CNNIC, and has this to say about it:
FWIW, I tried installing CNNIC's product in a virtual machine while running Sysinternals' ProcMon, and didn't spot anything super-suspicious--it did install a driver as MS said, which did seem excessive. And it did add a menu item to IE, but it didn't cause me to get any more popup ads. Seemed well-behaved, as far as I could tell (not that I spent much time with it). I then uninstalled it, and it seemed to remove itself cleanly, including the driver.
Personally, I would definitely be annoyed if it got installed without my consent, but the program itself does not meet my definition of "malware". Now if anyone has evidence that it's secretly nefarious and does more than what it claims to, please post the details.
I'm still running 64-bit XP (although I'm thinking of upgrading to 7), and I didn't have any problems with finding drivers for my peripherals. nVidia graphics card, LSI SCSI, Areca RAID, Logitech webcam, Canon flatbed scanner, Fujitsu Scansnap document scanner, DViCo ATSC tuner--all work fine. (Printer works fine too, although it's a network printer that supports PostScript and PCL, so it'd work with anything.)
While drivers may have been hard to find back when 64-bit XP was first released, after Vista came out, manufacturers started making 64-bit drivers (and for most devices, Vista 64 drivers work for XP 64).
Wow, you're quite the douche. People do not experience a reduction in their quality of life with one kidney. All the things you mention do impact quality of life.
And yes, I'd certainly donate a kidney to a loved one if they needed it.
So they solicited comments on a blog that no one reads and immediately say they aren't planning to change anything when questioned. After saying they wouldn't be changing the option, no one complained. Wow, what due diligence.
He didn't say that they weren't planning to change anything. He said that they weren't planning on changing "that option" (tabs vs. spaces). And they haven't--VS still lets you choose whether you want to indent with tabs or with spaces. The change is that if you indent with tabs, the indent must always be one tab, regardless of how many columns each tabstop is. Hardly seems like a onerous limitation to me.
"bing" means biscuit in Mandarin. It could be a coincidence, I'm just saying...
So some of the comments on the boingboing post, e.g., this one, have had their vowels removed and a "Moderator note" added, with a link to an article about "disemvoweling". The article says, "comments on blogs and in other online forums can be incredibly annoying, not to mention hate-filled and obscene. How can moderators walk the line between unregulated anarchy and oppressive censorship? Some have begun discouraging problem commenters by simply removing the vowels from their posts, a process known as disemvoweling. The offending message is rendered less obnoxious, but it's still possible for other readers to decipher it — f thy rlly wnt t."
So let's try to decipher one of the disemvoweled comments:
So that is what the moderators consider "offensive" enough that they think it should be censored? I looked a few more of the censored comments, and they were of a similar vein--suggesting that we don't know the whole story, but doing so politely. Sure is nice to see dissenting viewpoints being suppressed!
I don't know enough about Pre development to tell whether that's the entire source for an app, but yeah, that certainly does look like it could be it.
Artifex is the name of the company that owns Ghostscript, which is a Postscript interperter. Artifex offers Ghostscript under the GPL and a proprietary commercial license.
However, this lawsuit has nothing to do with Ghostscript, but muPDF, which is a PDF library written by Artifex, also offered under the GPL and a proprietary commercial license. Apparently, Palm has not purchased a commercial license to use muPDF, which means they need to abide by the terms of the GPL. However, they haven't provided the source to their PDF viewer app; all they've done is provide the source to the version of muPDF that they're using in their app, but that's not enough--muPDF is GPLed, not LGPLed.
That looks like the source to the muPDF rendering engine, not the source to the Pre's PDF viewer app. "Artifex alleges that Palm has copied Artifex's PDF rendering engine, called muPDF, and integrated it into the Palm Pre's PDF viewer application without the proper licensing conditions."
They almost certainly would. The prosecutor just has to make it clear that the only relevant fact is that he did download the images. It's completely irrelevant to his guilt or innocence that he immediately deleted the images. These laws leave absolutely no wiggle room with regards to intent.
Did you even read the indictment? The charge is that he "did knowingly receive and distribute ... [a visual depiction that] involved a minor engaging in sexually explicit conduct" (my emphasis). So it is in fact relevant whether he knew that he was download CP.
No, you're not automatically obligated to do any such thing. What happens is that you may be infringing on the copyrights on the GPL'd code, so it's up to the copyright holders to decide what to do: ignore it, negotiate a (presumably non-GPL) license agreement with you, or take you to court. And if the latter, the judge will decide what the punishment should be--most likely it'll be "stop distributing the software and pay the copyright holder $$$$$". It's unlikely that the punishment would be "publish the source code to your app that used GPLed code."
Yes you are obligated to do such a thing, and if you don't comply you can be dragged to court where you could be sentenced to pay for copyright infringement.
If one of the options is to not comply and pay for copyright infringement, how is that being obligated to release the source code? As I said, you're not obligated to release the source code. You're only obligated to do that if you want to license the code under the GPL--that text you quoted is from the GPL. However, you're not obligated to license the code under the GPL: you can ask the copyright holder to license it to you under some other license, or you can violate the GPL and accept the punishment for that. Depending on how badly you want to prevent your code from being open-sourced, and how much money you have, paying some money may be a very reasonable option.
And no it's not enough to pull the application, if you've distributed the binary and you've used GPL code you're obligated to release that code.
No, you're not automatically obligated to do any such thing. What happens is that you may be infringing on the copyrights on the GPL'd code, so it's up to the copyright holders to decide what to do: ignore it, negotiate a (presumably non-GPL) license agreement with you, or take you to court. And if the latter, the judge will decide what the punishment should be--most likely it'll be "stop distributing the software and pay the copyright holder $$$$$". It's unlikely that the punishment would be "publish the source code to your app that used GPLed code."
In the US, POTS calls are digitized at the central office at an 8kHz sampling rate, 8-bit mu-law samples. With the exception of mu-law vs. a-law, that's the same as what's used in, e.g., Europe, and the difference has no noticeable effect on sound quality--either way, it's still bandlimited to 4kHz (actually 3.6kHz). The callers on radio call-in shows in other countries don't sound any better than the ones in the US. And while doing the ADC at the phone is certainly nice, it doesn't have any significant effect on sound quality (unless you have an actual fault in the phone line that's introducing hum or static, in which case ISDN wouldn't work either). And yes, I had an ISDN line and ISDN phone back in the late '90s to early '00s and am very familiar with how a end-to-end digital call with no compression sounds. I liked it for its call control features (buttons to answer different lines, conference, hold, etc...), not because the sound quality was any better.
I'm not sure which part of that you're having difficulty with. The two statements are independent--"2/3 as many units" refers to the current sales figures. "Catching up" refers to the direction of change of those figures: they're increasing.
For example: if I sold an average of 6 apples a day and 9 oranges a day last week, and I sold an average of 8 apples a day and 9 oranges a day this week, I could say that I sold 2/3 as many apples as oranges last week, but that apple sales were catching up to the orange sales.
He has (numerous) honorary doctorates, but he earned his Ed.D.
I haven't seen any interpreted code yet... the excerpt posted appears to be a database table definition. I hope you're not suggesting that ballot definitions can't be stored in a database table.
There's an analysis of Bill Maher's anti-medicine stance on the Science-Based Medicine blog. It points out how he's considered an informed "skeptic" due to his anti-religious views, despite him embracing medical quackery.