Personally I like to think that - rather than focusing on how similar we are to other species - we are in fact very different from animals like lions on one thing. We have evolved into a culture and situation where we can actually live and let live, for first time in human history this has become possible pretty much around the globe (though maybe not 100% everywhere and everyone has that possibility). Unlike the big kitten, we have ways to think further than the plate in front of us, we can make highly sophisticated choices on how/what do we want to eat based on information about how nutritious something is - and fact is that eating meat is not a question of life and death, in fact it's very far from it. So far that personally I don't find eating meat an acceptable option - but I don't start preaching about it, however when someone speaks pro-carnivore and uses survival of humans (etc) as argument, like it was something mandatory for being able to life healthy, I do open my mouth too.
Hmm, not really that interested about this conversation (having seen, heard & spoken most arguments myself) but I have always wanted to ask, and be answered to, where exactly does it say that God (note to self: uses "He") cannot "really" be tested or proven? I mean, ok as a theory or perhaps just part of someones belief system, but above that, I don't see bible claiming this or that about whether God could be tested or not, yet I often have heard this argument...
Z drive to / can be removed you know? That's what I did... If I wanted something that was not under my home directory, which is the only place I allowed sometimes a wine drive to be attached (usually I only used dedicated folder(s) for wine drives though) I just symlinked the directory I wanted to use in wine under one of "wine drive" directories.
The Z drive was a surprise for me when I first time noticed it - wine did not always have that as default, it came couple years ago.
Btw, last time I read about test of running viruses under wine, most would not run (crashed) and those that did not crash did not manage to do harm either. I guess wines API implementation was not perfect enough for them at that time;)
I buy cheap and even used ofter - hard drives I prefer to be new. Since I moved to Linux I've had humongous drop in previously "occassional" errors - and when I do they are easy ones to solve mostly, as far as it's software error.
Hardware errors then again - well, especially with older machines you get them from time to time, but it's not that I was "willing to accept errors" but rather than my budget allows me to rarely buy new parts, with the exception of cheap ones (like, say, wireless kb+mouse, but they are not likely ones to break so I buy them used too, heh).
OS choice from Windows to Linux dramatically reduces errors from computer (the software part) AND in cheaper, so what is with that? I tell you - fear of unknown, beliefs that free can't be (as) good, etc.)
So, gamma rays arrive and it's a computer error? If going with your line of reasoning there really is no computer errors - whatever *ups they make it's most commonly either situation of human error or natural (small scale, but for the computer a large one) "disaster". More or less anyway, computers do as they are told to do, be the "guide" for their operation written in assembly (or compiled to it, interpreted, or...) or printed in their circuits it's never really a computer error if you start thinking like that...
It's really a case of semantics...
Unix shell scripts have language structures like conditionals (if), loops (for), it has those little things called functions and variables (and assigning output of program call to variable), piping output/input, etc. etc.
In short, shell scripts can be used even to create full applications, in example bashburner (naturally they depend on calling other applications).
DOS batch files have... well, labels, "if errorlevel" and goto - in short, they can be used to run program and echo output based on errorlevel (or jump to another point in batch).
In short - a unix shell script can be used to do the same as DOS batch files but not the other way around. Simple as that - if you want to argue, I recreated (it seems I'm not the only one) TREE command available at least under MS DOS 6.0 as bash script (without calling external commands at that, mind you). You replicate that in DOS batch file and you have proved your claim that batch files are indeed same as shell scripts:p
Finnish site eroakirkosta.fi translates to "resign from church" (or something close to that, not sure if "resign" is correct, "eroa" translates to several different words such as "resign" and "break away").
A factory does not buy things to sell, a factory produces things to sell. This is exactly the same thing patent trolls do but with copyrights instead - if they would have actually created the article then it would be different but they just bought it ONLY because someone had copied it so they could sue. You got to have a pretty twisted mind in this case to not see it as trolling, in my book at least.
The point of mentioning that Hitler said those things was obviously not to make people think that everything Hitler has said automatically makes those things being said for different means by someone else evil too.
The point is to make people understand how some things may sound like good but in fact can be very shallow and meaningless in that they can be used to support many kinds of good and bad things - that does not make law and order in itself anything bad.
I'm surprised so few people are intelligent enough to understand this.
Ever since I first time saw this images on what was then introduced me as "smart paper" I have hated them (or rather the "smart" hype) because there is nothing anymore smart than barcode is smart in them. And nobody in their right mind would call barcode smart.
Umm, where does he say something like that about beatles? That seems pretty controversial with there being a statue of John Lennon in a public park in Cuba...
And sure, he talks about the Bilderbergs - and from what I read it made sense to me too... I didn't read about the nazis but there is a lot of cases where you can quite legitimately "bring them up", ie. US company providing essential "goods" to both sides of war.
Also I have yet to see a torrent site which stores actual media (pirated or otherwise) that they "share". In reality it's users of those torrents that do the sharing and storing while those sites only store an index of a sort for connecting people willing to share or requesting to leech things.
Obviously this is the reason why in many countries (not just Sweden:) ) it is not that clear if these sites should or even could be denied by law. Should they be banned is another issue but one thing I firmly believe in is that banning them for sharing pirated media is unjust like any case where someone is punished for something he has not done.
You seem to be asking that something else, linux, apple, bsd, be allowed in without that same level of scrutiny.
I know that's exactly what I would be asking. No, not really, actually I would demand *more* scrutiny if Windows is used (and my demand for not using it for anything that important would not work). That can of course be translated (by small evil minds) to mean that I would allow some other system "without same level of scrutiny (than windows)".
I would never support windows (nor OS X but actually I just know too little about it and would only go for system that I know I can trust) in that or any other "serious business" environment (ie. hospitals should not use windows either, especially in any systems which working can be essential for someone to stay alive).
Anyway it's quite clear that you can't study Windows (any version) as thoroughly as you can study Linux or BSD systems and if they can ever upgrade the system (new system, more studying) then they truly can change it to another one too - and don't say it's much more work than just keeping the old OS, that I could perhaps understand as an argument if we were talking about some small business and not about part of your country's system for national security... But hey, it's not my army and I don't really care about army anyway but I would still have them rather use a decent system in finnish army if my opinion were to be asked.
I was talking about "people" not geeks. I know plenty of people who are computer literate enough to be able to use one but who after a time are stumped by Linux when they veer off the path because everything is different enough that their experience doesn't matter. Linux is OK when you install it for people with a static hardware setup and software need, when you can "set it and forget it."
I know people to whom I...:
* installed it
* asked what they do with computer
* if there was anything in the answers that I felt better to educate them about I did
* I showed program and system menus with brief explanation (including comparisons and differences to windows there)
* told them to follow instructions and like in windows do what it tells when it tells you there are updates and then showed them synaptic package manager (simple interface) and told them that all new programs they want they can look for in here and just select one that they like for install
*...and then forget it. ...who then later after not calling for me to help told me that they were surprised to find it really was easier and better to use than windows (hell, even the "start menu" is organized logically under clean easy-to-look submenus instead of cramming the whole load of programs in one menu as huge eye-hurting list where there was no grouping of whatsoever by category, just a long list of entries, some by software some by manufacturer name).
Too much to do? We *are* putting them in front of a whole new system with different interface and inner parts and they are normal people not geeks (as for geeks we would not have to even perform the installation), this is very short thing (takes much less than the installation itself). If not ready to take this short time to educate them then maybe one should not be setting up new operating system on regular non computer savvy people who have already gotten used to some other system - specially adults will often fail at that without any instructions but the instructions really needed are often amazingly simple (to get them to trust themselves that they CAN use this system and start to learn without live guidance).
That's a very short "educational moment" in addition to the time spent
3D desktop effects to mimick Aero certainly would not be good for older machine, however the good thing seems to be (I only checked the webpage and screenshots there, I don't even use Gnome - nor Ubuntu but that is not the issue since the theme is not Ubuntu- but Gnome-specific) that the enhanced GUI effects are included in the themes customization menus as optional preferences. So the GUI effects don't have to "help" older machines in any way:p If it is not capable to run those effects in Compiz Fusion it would not run them on Win 7's Aero either so nothing is lost there.
From my understanding it does replicate the taskbar - I have not used Win 7 and didn't test this either as I don't use Gnome, just an extremely light and efficient window manager without any Desktop Environment on top of it. Also in my experience Ubuntu on (*really*) older machine is much lighter than WinXP and I doubt that Win7 is... And that's just with regular unmodified install without any actions done to lighten up the system - and there is quite some things you can do without changing gnome to some lighter windowing/desktop setup so you can get it to run with quite a lot smaller systems req's.
...and at last, lightness at side you get some other extras (stability, security, etc...) and lose some unnecessary things that waste your or your computers time/resources (filesystem does not need defragging, bloated antivirus software is not necessary, system updates also automagically update any linux software installed via ubuntus package management from repositories)...
So in the end I see quite a few benefits to gain:)
Does not include all the "whiz-bang stuff" you can do with bash and GNU toolset, let alone some more usual tools - and naturally if the scripting is so advanced that bash is not efficient or comfortable there is always external languages like perl (to mention a more high-level one that still also fits for writing small (or big) scripts too.
Does not, can not include "a whole host of GNU tools" because those are licensed under GPL (and that package is not) - however GNU tools are mostly (emphasis on mostly - and most) more evolved but backwards compatible rewrites of original UNIX tools of various sort and Services for UNIX do provide similar toolset, just not as evolved in functionality.
And yes, I have actually tried it. I find cygwin more useful for me - and that one actually comes with GNU tools.
Here in Finland there is actually a minimum limit for requirement to pay income tax and even if you run registered company if it makes below that you don't have to pay income tax. Although I'm not one of those that support lowering taxes and complain about them all of time but realize that it's what pays for public healthcare, keeping roads in fit, etc. I think it's a good system and don't know why one should be ripped from such small money.
research would be much more valuable to me if it was accessible.
Yes, certainly. What I'm asking here is, where do you obtain the right to that value, as opposed to the people who did the work? Is it your position that just because something is valuable, it should be given to you? What if that changes the value available to the inventors? Should it still be given to you anyway?
Now I'm not the one you were writing to but I will state my opinion on your questions.
1st of all I'm very much against "intellectual property". That does not mean that I think anyone with so-called IP should give it to me against his will, I just don't think it is something you can own and thus can't be property - ownership in this case is purely imaginational man made set of rules with no basis in reality.
However I must state, before I continue, that my resistance is not against software products nor copyright (as long as it will be limited in time), these are not what I mean when I talk about IP - nor does it seem to me that companies mean that either.
Knowledge and ideas is not something you can own. Sure, you can sell them or keep them to yourself. You can even make a contract with instance you are giving/selling your "IP" for that they agree to not publist the information (or even use it to create a competing product).
And most of all, you can use it to make new products and make money with them.
However it gets more or less questionable when you state that if other people decide to build product based on some part on those ideas of yours they should have your permission (unless you made them agree with a contract to that).
It get's *really* ridiculous when someone can sue me for using "their IP" if I came up with the idea by myself - it's outrageous that some people actually claim ownership on ideas and they not only claim ownership for theirs but mine too if they just had (or registered they have) it before me.
Yes, one thing I'm referring is to patent system - something originally made for good purpose, something that I don't necessarily even oppose where it serves that purpose. However some fields where I think it not only does not but actually serves quite opposite purposes (it was made for public benefit and to add development). Some places where it most definately does not belong to is software and medical business.
society has much more ignorants than savants, so why should fencing knowledge be a net gain to society?
Simply speaking, it's a viable economic model. It's provided a great deal of progress in a very short time -- surely you recognize that in the last hundred years or so, we have made more technical / knowledge progress than ever before in human history; if we cannot credit a capitalist attitude towards knowledge as the cause, we can at least say that the capitalist attitude towards knowledge hasn't prevented it from happening.
It's not much of an argument that provides any support for it. At best it is a half truth, much of the progress has benefited loads of also being able to use others "IP" as it's now called - and software industry most definately suffers hugely from patent/IP madness. Sure that has not prevented development from happening on that field too;) But it is one of things that slow it down, even pushes startup companies off from getting into market.
It's really kind of hard for me to fault the system. And while I see others trying, I don't yet see anything convincing in the various contrary arguments.
Caffeine is not the same kind of stimulant as methylphenidate (ritalin, concerta) or dextroamphetamine, it does not stimulate through dopamine and it does not help ADHD person to concentrate - in fact caffeine does only negative things to your concentration except maybe through helping tiredness and increasing your energy to do things, which might be perceived as increase of concentration.
One case where caffeine helps to focus is also when your brain is getting used to it - and in that case it's more like lack of caffeine causing decrease in focus, not caffeine increasing it.
Negative effects of caffeine can show up much stronger in ADHD people - yet sometimes I enjoy a lot stimulating myself with it, even sometimes when working.
Sounds to me as an adult ADHD person that it's either a too large dose or they don't really even have ADHD. One sign is the loss of appetite, dopamine stimulants can do that but they usually should not cause that when used in medical doses to treat a real problem - and if they do that should be a passing side-effect.
Mod the above post up, I would have but I lost my mod points as I did not think about time difference (thought I would have the whole day left but the day changed earlier wherever slasdot server is located at).
The point about just renting bandwidth is the point I would personally like to make against those pro-net regulating folks who claim that it's the matter of business to choose provide some "services" at slower rates than others - the service ISP's are selling is the connection to internet and the certain bandwidth and that's it.
This is coming from land of law enforced net neutrality, Finland!
...before it came an OS, that is Win3.x series (Win95 can be called OS, although DOS based but Win 3.x was not OS but one would not call it just a toolkit either).
Slashdot Mirror
Personally I like to think that - rather than focusing on how similar we are to other species - we are in fact very different from animals like lions on one thing. We have evolved into a culture and situation where we can actually live and let live, for first time in human history this has become possible pretty much around the globe (though maybe not 100% everywhere and everyone has that possibility). Unlike the big kitten, we have ways to think further than the plate in front of us, we can make highly sophisticated choices on how/what do we want to eat based on information about how nutritious something is - and fact is that eating meat is not a question of life and death, in fact it's very far from it. So far that personally I don't find eating meat an acceptable option - but I don't start preaching about it, however when someone speaks pro-carnivore and uses survival of humans (etc) as argument, like it was something mandatory for being able to life healthy, I do open my mouth too.
Hmm, not really that interested about this conversation (having seen, heard & spoken most arguments myself) but I have always wanted to ask, and be answered to, where exactly does it say that God (note to self: uses "He") cannot "really" be tested or proven? I mean, ok as a theory or perhaps just part of someones belief system, but above that, I don't see bible claiming this or that about whether God could be tested or not, yet I often have heard this argument...
The Z drive was a surprise for me when I first time noticed it - wine did not always have that as default, it came couple years ago.
Btw, last time I read about test of running viruses under wine, most would not run (crashed) and those that did not crash did not manage to do harm either. I guess wines API implementation was not perfect enough for them at that time ;)
I buy cheap and even used ofter - hard drives I prefer to be new. Since I moved to Linux I've had humongous drop in previously "occassional" errors - and when I do they are easy ones to solve mostly, as far as it's software error.
Hardware errors then again - well, especially with older machines you get them from time to time, but it's not that I was "willing to accept errors" but rather than my budget allows me to rarely buy new parts, with the exception of cheap ones (like, say, wireless kb+mouse, but they are not likely ones to break so I buy them used too, heh).
OS choice from Windows to Linux dramatically reduces errors from computer (the software part) AND in cheaper, so what is with that? I tell you - fear of unknown, beliefs that free can't be (as) good, etc.)
So, gamma rays arrive and it's a computer error? If going with your line of reasoning there really is no computer errors - whatever *ups they make it's most commonly either situation of human error or natural (small scale, but for the computer a large one) "disaster". More or less anyway, computers do as they are told to do, be the "guide" for their operation written in assembly (or compiled to it, interpreted, or...) or printed in their circuits it's never really a computer error if you start thinking like that... It's really a case of semantics...
Unix shell scripts have language structures like conditionals (if), loops (for), it has those little things called functions and variables (and assigning output of program call to variable), piping output/input, etc. etc.
In short, shell scripts can be used even to create full applications, in example bashburner (naturally they depend on calling other applications).
DOS batch files have... well, labels, "if errorlevel" and goto - in short, they can be used to run program and echo output based on errorlevel (or jump to another point in batch).
In short - a unix shell script can be used to do the same as DOS batch files but not the other way around. Simple as that - if you want to argue, I recreated (it seems I'm not the only one) TREE command available at least under MS DOS 6.0 as bash script (without calling external commands at that, mind you). You replicate that in DOS batch file and you have proved your claim that batch files are indeed same as shell scripts :p
Finnish site eroakirkosta.fi translates to "resign from church" (or something close to that, not sure if "resign" is correct, "eroa" translates to several different words such as "resign" and "break away").
A factory does not buy things to sell, a factory produces things to sell. This is exactly the same thing patent trolls do but with copyrights instead - if they would have actually created the article then it would be different but they just bought it ONLY because someone had copied it so they could sue. You got to have a pretty twisted mind in this case to not see it as trolling, in my book at least.
The point of mentioning that Hitler said those things was obviously not to make people think that everything Hitler has said automatically makes those things being said for different means by someone else evil too.
The point is to make people understand how some things may sound like good but in fact can be very shallow and meaningless in that they can be used to support many kinds of good and bad things - that does not make law and order in itself anything bad.
I'm surprised so few people are intelligent enough to understand this.
The charges WERE DROPPED. Also you can shove your "terrorist card" up your...
Ever since I first time saw this images on what was then introduced me as "smart paper" I have hated them (or rather the "smart" hype) because there is nothing anymore smart than barcode is smart in them. And nobody in their right mind would call barcode smart.
Umm, where does he say something like that about beatles? That seems pretty controversial with there being a statue of John Lennon in a public park in Cuba...
And sure, he talks about the Bilderbergs - and from what I read it made sense to me too... I didn't read about the nazis but there is a lot of cases where you can quite legitimately "bring them up", ie. US company providing essential "goods" to both sides of war.
Also I have yet to see a torrent site which stores actual media (pirated or otherwise) that they "share". In reality it's users of those torrents that do the sharing and storing while those sites only store an index of a sort for connecting people willing to share or requesting to leech things.
Obviously this is the reason why in many countries (not just Sweden :) ) it is not that clear if these sites should or even could be denied by law. Should they be banned is another issue but one thing I firmly believe in is that banning them for sharing pirated media is unjust like any case where someone is punished for something he has not done.
You seem to be asking that something else, linux, apple, bsd, be allowed in without that same level of scrutiny.
I know that's exactly what I would be asking. No, not really, actually I would demand *more* scrutiny if Windows is used (and my demand for not using it for anything that important would not work). That can of course be translated (by small evil minds) to mean that I would allow some other system "without same level of scrutiny (than windows)".
I would never support windows (nor OS X but actually I just know too little about it and would only go for system that I know I can trust) in that or any other "serious business" environment (ie. hospitals should not use windows either, especially in any systems which working can be essential for someone to stay alive).
Anyway it's quite clear that you can't study Windows (any version) as thoroughly as you can study Linux or BSD systems and if they can ever upgrade the system (new system, more studying) then they truly can change it to another one too - and don't say it's much more work than just keeping the old OS, that I could perhaps understand as an argument if we were talking about some small business and not about part of your country's system for national security... But hey, it's not my army and I don't really care about army anyway but I would still have them rather use a decent system in finnish army if my opinion were to be asked.
I was talking about "people" not geeks. I know plenty of people who are computer literate enough to be able to use one but who after a time are stumped by Linux when they veer off the path because everything is different enough that their experience doesn't matter. Linux is OK when you install it for people with a static hardware setup and software need, when you can "set it and forget it."
I know people to whom I...: ...and then forget it.
...who then later after not calling for me to help told me that they were surprised to find it really was easier and better to use than windows (hell, even the "start menu" is organized logically under clean easy-to-look submenus instead of cramming the whole load of programs in one menu as huge eye-hurting list where there was no grouping of whatsoever by category, just a long list of entries, some by software some by manufacturer name).
* installed it
* asked what they do with computer
* if there was anything in the answers that I felt better to educate them about I did
* I showed program and system menus with brief explanation (including comparisons and differences to windows there)
* told them to follow instructions and like in windows do what it tells when it tells you there are updates and then showed them synaptic package manager (simple interface) and told them that all new programs they want they can look for in here and just select one that they like for install *
Too much to do? We *are* putting them in front of a whole new system with different interface and inner parts and they are normal people not geeks (as for geeks we would not have to even perform the installation), this is very short thing (takes much less than the installation itself). If not ready to take this short time to educate them then maybe one should not be setting up new operating system on regular non computer savvy people who have already gotten used to some other system - specially adults will often fail at that without any instructions but the instructions really needed are often amazingly simple (to get them to trust themselves that they CAN use this system and start to learn without live guidance).
That's a very short "educational moment" in addition to the time spent
3D desktop effects to mimick Aero certainly would not be good for older machine, however the good thing seems to be (I only checked the webpage and screenshots there, I don't even use Gnome - nor Ubuntu but that is not the issue since the theme is not Ubuntu- but Gnome-specific) that the enhanced GUI effects are included in the themes customization menus as optional preferences. So the GUI effects don't have to "help" older machines in any way :p If it is not capable to run those effects in Compiz Fusion it would not run them on Win 7's Aero either so nothing is lost there.
From my understanding it does replicate the taskbar - I have not used Win 7 and didn't test this either as I don't use Gnome, just an extremely light and efficient window manager without any Desktop Environment on top of it. Also in my experience Ubuntu on (*really*) older machine is much lighter than WinXP and I doubt that Win7 is... And that's just with regular unmodified install without any actions done to lighten up the system - and there is quite some things you can do without changing gnome to some lighter windowing/desktop setup so you can get it to run with quite a lot smaller systems req's.
...and at last, lightness at side you get some other extras (stability, security, etc...) and lose some unnecessary things that waste your or your computers time/resources (filesystem does not need defragging, bloated antivirus software is not necessary, system updates also automagically update any linux software installed via ubuntus package management from repositories)... :)
So in the end I see quite a few benefits to gain
Does not include all the "whiz-bang stuff" you can do with bash and GNU toolset, let alone some more usual tools - and naturally if the scripting is so advanced that bash is not efficient or comfortable there is always external languages like perl (to mention a more high-level one that still also fits for writing small (or big) scripts too.
Does not, can not include "a whole host of GNU tools" because those are licensed under GPL (and that package is not) - however GNU tools are mostly (emphasis on mostly - and most) more evolved but backwards compatible rewrites of original UNIX tools of various sort and Services for UNIX do provide similar toolset, just not as evolved in functionality.
And yes, I have actually tried it. I find cygwin more useful for me - and that one actually comes with GNU tools.
Here in Finland there is actually a minimum limit for requirement to pay income tax and even if you run registered company if it makes below that you don't have to pay income tax. Although I'm not one of those that support lowering taxes and complain about them all of time but realize that it's what pays for public healthcare, keeping roads in fit, etc. I think it's a good system and don't know why one should be ripped from such small money.
Yes, certainly. What I'm asking here is, where do you obtain the right to that value, as opposed to the people who did the work? Is it your position that just because something is valuable, it should be given to you? What if that changes the value available to the inventors? Should it still be given to you anyway?
Now I'm not the one you were writing to but I will state my opinion on your questions. 1st of all I'm very much against "intellectual property". That does not mean that I think anyone with so-called IP should give it to me against his will, I just don't think it is something you can own and thus can't be property - ownership in this case is purely imaginational man made set of rules with no basis in reality. However I must state, before I continue, that my resistance is not against software products nor copyright (as long as it will be limited in time), these are not what I mean when I talk about IP - nor does it seem to me that companies mean that either. Knowledge and ideas is not something you can own. Sure, you can sell them or keep them to yourself. You can even make a contract with instance you are giving/selling your "IP" for that they agree to not publist the information (or even use it to create a competing product).
And most of all, you can use it to make new products and make money with them.
However it gets more or less questionable when you state that if other people decide to build product based on some part on those ideas of yours they should have your permission (unless you made them agree with a contract to that). It get's *really* ridiculous when someone can sue me for using "their IP" if I came up with the idea by myself - it's outrageous that some people actually claim ownership on ideas and they not only claim ownership for theirs but mine too if they just had (or registered they have) it before me.
Yes, one thing I'm referring is to patent system - something originally made for good purpose, something that I don't necessarily even oppose where it serves that purpose. However some fields where I think it not only does not but actually serves quite opposite purposes (it was made for public benefit and to add development). Some places where it most definately does not belong to is software and medical business.
Simply speaking, it's a viable economic model. It's provided a great deal of progress in a very short time -- surely you recognize that in the last hundred years or so, we have made more technical / knowledge progress than ever before in human history; if we cannot credit a capitalist attitude towards knowledge as the cause, we can at least say that the capitalist attitude towards knowledge hasn't prevented it from happening.
It's not much of an argument that provides any support for it. At best it is a half truth, much of the progress has benefited loads of also being able to use others "IP" as it's now called - and software industry most definately suffers hugely from patent/IP madness. Sure that has not prevented development from happening on that field too ;) But it is one of things that slow it down, even pushes startup companies off from getting into market.
It's really kind of hard for me to fault the system. And while I see others trying, I don't yet see anything convincing in the various contrary arguments.
I can - and have actually blogged about it:
Software patent laws should be ditched
Anger about software patents
Negative effects of caffeine can show up much stronger in ADHD people - yet sometimes I enjoy a lot stimulating myself with it, even sometimes when working.
Sounds to me as an adult ADHD person that it's either a too large dose or they don't really even have ADHD. One sign is the loss of appetite, dopamine stimulants can do that but they usually should not cause that when used in medical doses to treat a real problem - and if they do that should be a passing side-effect.
That's not what = means. = is ASSIGNMENT. They're looking for ==.
Since we are talking about numerical comparison you must mean "eq", not "==".
Mod the above post up, I would have but I lost my mod points as I did not think about time difference (thought I would have the whole day left but the day changed earlier wherever slasdot server is located at). The point about just renting bandwidth is the point I would personally like to make against those pro-net regulating folks who claim that it's the matter of business to choose provide some "services" at slower rates than others - the service ISP's are selling is the connection to internet and the certain bandwidth and that's it. This is coming from land of law enforced net neutrality, Finland!
...before it came an OS, that is Win3.x series (Win95 can be called OS, although DOS based but Win 3.x was not OS but one would not call it just a toolkit either).