The tank itself was well respected as a strong and efficient machine.
That's the tank that the Germans referred to as the "Ronson" because it was a one touch lighter, or "Tommy cooker", "tommy" being slang for a British soldier. So I guess whether it's a Sherman tank or a septic tank you are in, you are in deep shit.
I don't disagree with your larger point, but I used to believe this too and it turns out it's wrong. If you distribute a binary, anyone may request a copy of the source, not just the recipients of the binary.
Section 6b of the GPL v3
Convey the object code in, or embodied in, a physical product (including a physical distribution medium), accompanied by a written offer, valid for at least three years and valid for as long as you offer spare parts or customer support for that product model, to give anyone who possesses the object code either (1) a copy of the Corresponding Source for all the software in the product that is covered by this License, on a durable physical medium customarily used for software interchange, for a price no more than your reasonable cost of physically performing this conveying of source, or (2) access to copy the Corresponding Source from a network server at no charge.
Hm, it already did happen. Nowadays most programmers won't touch closed-source libraries with a ten foot pole.
Win32,.Net? Cocoa Touch?
A fair proportion of all programmers probably deal with those closed source libraries every day.
People used to be fine with weird undocumented file formats, now it's insane to even suggest it and whole governments throw your solutiion away when its file formats are undocumented.
Most people are still fine with undocumented file formats.
Vendor lock-in is prosecuted by the courts and in some cases made illegal by the law to even try.
Citation needed.
Many many more people are aware of the dangers of DRM and wary of throwing money into the gutter.
And yet people still buy Kindles and iPods.
There are projects for Free hardware, Free operating systems, all the way up to CAD applications and math programs.
But for the most part they are not getting any traction.
What change exactly are you waiting for?
It was claimed that Stallman is instigating societal change, not a change merely within the software industry. Most people I know have never even heard of him. Most people I know don't give a flying fuck about being able to read and modify the source code. Most of them aren't computer programmers. They just want their computers and phones and tablets to work.
Properly calibrated scales will show the same weight for a given mass on the north pole as it would at the equator.
That would depend on the principle used by the scales.
If the scales works by comparing the weight force of the mass to be measured against some reference mass as e.g. a beam balance, you are correct, and it will work on the Moon and Mars too.
If the scales works by measurement of extension or compression of a spring as most bathroom scales do or a spring balance, the measurement will be different at the North pole as compared to the equator since the apparent force experienced by the mass being measured is different.
The second (SI unit of time) is chosen to be the time defined by an arbitrary number of periods of the radiation of an arbitrary atom changing between two arbitrary states.
The metre is (SI unit of length) is defined as the distance light travels in an arbitrarily chosen fraction of a second.
The kilogram (SI unit of mass) is defined as the mass of a particular arbitrary lump of metal.
The ampere (SI unit of current) is defined in terms of an arbitrary force between two infinite wires an arbitrary distance apart (the arbitrary distance is 1 metre).
The kelvin (SI unit of temperature) is defined as an arbitrary fraction of the difference between absolute zero nd the triple point of an arbitrary liquid.
The mole (SI unit of quantity) is defined as the number of atoms of an arbitrary element in an arbitrary mass of that element.
The UK is semi-metric. Road signs still use miles but weather is metric and beverages are sold by milliliters.
Actually, in the UK, beverages are served in millilitres except for beer in pubs which will always be served in pints even if legally it has to be priced in units of 0.568261485 litre.
Quite a lot of the UKs electricity is generated by burning fossil fuels. Given the inefficiencies inherent in the process and the transmission lines and the mass of the Tesla's battery, I would not be at all surprised if it turned out that the Tesla burned more fossil fuel in the Top Gear test than the equivalently sized Lotus Elise would have.
with particle accelerators, the bigger the better. Here's why:
If you want your collisions to produce really exotic products e.g. the Higgs boson, you need high energy collisions which means your particles have to be travelling really fast. If you want your particles to be travelling really fast, you need a lot of distance to get them up to speed. If you build your particle accelerator as a straight line, you only have so much distance to get them up to speed. If you build it as a circle, you effectivley have infinite distance if you want it.
However, if you build your particle accelerator as a circle, you need something to make the particles go round in a circle or they'll hit the wall (cf Newton's 1st law of motion). Fortunately, charged particles like protons and electrons will go round in a circle if they are moving through a magnetic field. However, for any fixed size circle, the faster the particles are going, the stronger the magnetic field needed to make them keep to the circle. For any given speed, a big circle requires a weaker magnetic field than a small circle. So you need to make your circle as big as possible and your magnets as strong as possible to get the highest energy collisions.
If Apple really was worth the money, then why do they make more per machine they sell than any other manufacturer?
Because the machines they make are worth the money. If they were not worth the money, people would not buy them and they would be forced to lower the price and their margin.
Whether something is "worth the money" is not a function of manufacturing cost but of the perceived benefit to the buyer.
Don't kid yourself about OSX. You may like it, but it has it's own share of UI disasters. Some like having the Trash and Eject be the same UI target were a dumb idea from day one.
Nowadays, when you start dragging a removable disk, the trash can turns into an eject symbol. I still don't use it, it's easier to right click on the icon and select the "eject" option.
Some, like having all of the menus at the top of the screen made sense when we were on low resolution single screen systems, but are detriments in multi-monitor high resolutions systems
It makes absolute sense given the Macintosh paradigm of window = document. You can still see the menu bar even when there are no documents open. Windows has the paradigm window = application which means that, to see the menu bar you must have always have a document open or an empty window.
and some of them are brand new bonehead decisions like choose to use a green plus for a button that will shrink the screen.
It doesn't shrink the screen, or even the document window it is attached to necessarily. It always makes the window exactly big enough to show all the content of the document (or as much content as is possible given the size of the screen). This usually involves making the window bigger.
How many times have you had to migrate your iTunes library to a new machine and then get it all working with your iPhone without losing any apps or media?
Four times
How much of your media collection is embargoed because of Apple DRM?
None.
How much of your media metadata do you need to reapply after a fresh migration?
None.
I have never had any problems migrating an iTunes library between two machines.
I'd have to stop using Google as my search engine if they did that. When I do a search I want the page that is most likely to answer my question at the top, not the site that has the best IPv6 support.
People that claim that living cells somehow came to be out of a chemical soup don't know much about science. The concept of abiogenesis (life from non-living matter) has NEVER been shown to be possible
People that claim abiogenesis and evolution amount to the same thing do not know anything about science. You should have just shut up instead of displaying your ignorance to the World.
It is so statistically improbable that that it staggers the imagination that anyone can claim to even consider it part of science.
If nobody knows how abiogenesis happened, how can you possibly claim that it is statistically improbable?
It comes down to the same issue every time, which is whether there is a God or not.
Actually, the theory of evolution has nothing to do with whether there is a god or not? Where on Earth did you get that idea.
Evolution is a pathetic attempt to counter the idea that there must be some intelligent design behind the universe.
No it isn't. Evolution is an observed fact (and a solid theory to explain that fact). It's no more an attempt to do away with God than the heliocentric model of the solar system.
Science is science until we get to the theory of evolution where the religious belief, and claiming no religion IS a religious belief, of the person gets revealed.
I think you need to educate yourself about what the Theory of Evolution really is. You clearly don't know.
I agree the older developer needs to find a new job but mainly because the company is paying far too much for its fresh out of college employees and will therefore likely go bust shortly.
Sudoku is too easy to be a useful AI exercise. In fact, once you take into account all the symmetries including the fact that if you swap any two digits everywhere on the grid, you have the same puzzle (e.g. if you tur all the 2's into 5's and all the 5's into 2's), there are only about 45,000 different solved grids.
Slashdot Mirror
The tank itself was well respected as a strong and efficient machine.
That's the tank that the Germans referred to as the "Ronson" because it was a one touch lighter, or "Tommy cooker", "tommy" being slang for a British soldier. So I guess whether it's a Sherman tank or a septic tank you are in, you are in deep shit.
I don't disagree with your larger point, but I used to believe this too and it turns out it's wrong. If you distribute a binary, anyone may request a copy of the source, not just the recipients of the binary.
Section 6b of the GPL v3
There are plenty of changes in the iOS 4.3 version that never made it to that repository.
Such as?
Hm, it already did happen. Nowadays most programmers won't touch closed-source libraries with a ten foot pole.
Win32, .Net? Cocoa Touch?
A fair proportion of all programmers probably deal with those closed source libraries every day.
People used to be fine with weird undocumented file formats, now it's insane to even suggest it and whole governments throw your solutiion away when its file formats are undocumented.
Most people are still fine with undocumented file formats.
Vendor lock-in is prosecuted by the courts and in some cases made illegal by the law to even try.
Citation needed.
Many many more people are aware of the dangers of DRM and wary of throwing money into the gutter.
And yet people still buy Kindles and iPods.
There are projects for Free hardware, Free operating systems, all the way up to CAD applications and math programs.
But for the most part they are not getting any traction.
What change exactly are you waiting for?
It was claimed that Stallman is instigating societal change, not a change merely within the software industry. Most people I know have never even heard of him. Most people I know don't give a flying fuck about being able to read and modify the source code. Most of them aren't computer programmers. They just want their computers and phones and tablets to work.
You accidentally linked to one of your home movies. Is that you on the bed? It certainly looks like a huge asshole.
Properly calibrated scales will show the same weight for a given mass on the north pole as it would at the equator.
That would depend on the principle used by the scales.
If the scales works by comparing the weight force of the mass to be measured against some reference mass as e.g. a beam balance, you are correct, and it will work on the Moon and Mars too.
If the scales works by measurement of extension or compression of a spring as most bathroom scales do or a spring balance, the measurement will be different at the North pole as compared to the equator since the apparent force experienced by the mass being measured is different.
The second (SI unit of time) is chosen to be the time defined by an arbitrary number of periods of the radiation of an arbitrary atom changing between two arbitrary states.
The metre is (SI unit of length) is defined as the distance light travels in an arbitrarily chosen fraction of a second.
The kilogram (SI unit of mass) is defined as the mass of a particular arbitrary lump of metal.
The ampere (SI unit of current) is defined in terms of an arbitrary force between two infinite wires an arbitrary distance apart (the arbitrary distance is 1 metre).
The kelvin (SI unit of temperature) is defined as an arbitrary fraction of the difference between absolute zero nd the triple point of an arbitrary liquid.
The mole (SI unit of quantity) is defined as the number of atoms of an arbitrary element in an arbitrary mass of that element.
ounces of what?
The UK is semi-metric. Road signs still use miles but weather is metric and beverages are sold by milliliters.
Actually, in the UK, beverages are served in millilitres except for beer in pubs which will always be served in pints even if legally it has to be priced in units of 0.568261485 litre.
Aslan is Jesus. The whole Narnia series is based on different parts of Christianity.
Google's only product is page views. Everything else they do is only there to attract people to view their adverts.
Only real surprise in the article is that it didn't mention how this would impact house prices.
Completely wrong: there is at least one other real surprise in that it makes no mention of how illegal immigrants are benefiting from the situation.
Quite a lot of the UKs electricity is generated by burning fossil fuels. Given the inefficiencies inherent in the process and the transmission lines and the mass of the Tesla's battery, I would not be at all surprised if it turned out that the Tesla burned more fossil fuel in the Top Gear test than the equivalently sized Lotus Elise would have.
with particle accelerators, the bigger the better. Here's why:
If you want your collisions to produce really exotic products e.g. the Higgs boson, you need high energy collisions which means your particles have to be travelling really fast. If you want your particles to be travelling really fast, you need a lot of distance to get them up to speed. If you build your particle accelerator as a straight line, you only have so much distance to get them up to speed. If you build it as a circle, you effectivley have infinite distance if you want it.
However, if you build your particle accelerator as a circle, you need something to make the particles go round in a circle or they'll hit the wall (cf Newton's 1st law of motion). Fortunately, charged particles like protons and electrons will go round in a circle if they are moving through a magnetic field. However, for any fixed size circle, the faster the particles are going, the stronger the magnetic field needed to make them keep to the circle. For any given speed, a big circle requires a weaker magnetic field than a small circle. So you need to make your circle as big as possible and your magnets as strong as possible to get the highest energy collisions.
If Apple really was worth the money, then why do they make more per machine they sell than any other manufacturer?
Because the machines they make are worth the money. If they were not worth the money, people would not buy them and they would be forced to lower the price and their margin.
Whether something is "worth the money" is not a function of manufacturing cost but of the perceived benefit to the buyer.
Don't kid yourself about OSX. You may like it, but it has it's own share of UI disasters. Some like having the Trash and Eject be the same UI target were a dumb idea from day one.
Nowadays, when you start dragging a removable disk, the trash can turns into an eject symbol. I still don't use it, it's easier to right click on the icon and select the "eject" option.
Some, like having all of the menus at the top of the screen made sense when we were on low resolution single screen systems, but are detriments in multi-monitor high resolutions systems
It makes absolute sense given the Macintosh paradigm of window = document. You can still see the menu bar even when there are no documents open. Windows has the paradigm window = application which means that, to see the menu bar you must have always have a document open or an empty window.
and some of them are brand new bonehead decisions like choose to use a green plus for a button that will shrink the screen.
It doesn't shrink the screen, or even the document window it is attached to necessarily. It always makes the window exactly big enough to show all the content of the document (or as much content as is possible given the size of the screen). This usually involves making the window bigger.
Well you can't expect to wield supreme executive power just because some watery tart threw a sword at you.
How many times have you had to migrate your iTunes library to a new machine and then get it all working with your iPhone without losing any apps or media?
Four times
How much of your media collection is embargoed because of Apple DRM?
None.
How much of your media metadata do you need to reapply after a fresh migration?
None.
I have never had any problems migrating an iTunes library between two machines.
I'd have to stop using Google as my search engine if they did that. When I do a search I want the page that is most likely to answer my question at the top, not the site that has the best IPv6 support.
It's under my desk.
Damn, I just accidentally kicked the power cable out.
People that claim that living cells somehow came to be out of a chemical soup don't know much about science. The concept of abiogenesis (life from non-living matter) has NEVER been shown to be possible
People that claim abiogenesis and evolution amount to the same thing do not know anything about science. You should have just shut up instead of displaying your ignorance to the World.
It is so statistically improbable that that it staggers the imagination that anyone can claim to even consider it part of science.
If nobody knows how abiogenesis happened, how can you possibly claim that it is statistically improbable?
It comes down to the same issue every time, which is whether there is a God or not.
Actually, the theory of evolution has nothing to do with whether there is a god or not? Where on Earth did you get that idea.
Evolution is a pathetic attempt to counter the idea that there must be some intelligent design behind the universe.
No it isn't. Evolution is an observed fact (and a solid theory to explain that fact). It's no more an attempt to do away with God than the heliocentric model of the solar system.
Science is science until we get to the theory of evolution where the religious belief, and claiming no religion IS a religious belief, of the person gets revealed.
I think you need to educate yourself about what the Theory of Evolution really is. You clearly don't know.
The rotation thing doesn't work. It would say WedqeM
I agree the older developer needs to find a new job but mainly because the company is paying far too much for its fresh out of college employees and will therefore likely go bust shortly.
Sudoku is too easy to be a useful AI exercise. In fact, once you take into account all the symmetries including the fact that if you swap any two digits everywhere on the grid, you have the same puzzle (e.g. if you tur all the 2's into 5's and all the 5's into 2's), there are only about 45,000 different solved grids.
The only thing I expected from Slashdot was for people to have a little giggle
You must be new here.