The individuals who post here work at Sun Microsystems. The opinions expressed here are their own, are not necessarily reviewed in advance by anyone but the individual authors, and neither Sun nor any other party necessarily agrees with them.
Sounds about as official as a Slashdot post to me.
We all benefit when companies allow and encouragew their employees to blog. Calling blog posts "official" may sex up a/. article, but isn't really accurate.
How about Japan and (West) Germany after World War II? I suppose you could argue that Germany had some experience with democracy between the wars, but democracy was imposed in Japan by the US occupation--no revolution, no democratic tradition.
Larry Niven and Jerry Pournelle's sci-fi novel Lucifer's Hammer has a great scene where the astrophysicist Dan Forrester goes through a back-of-the-envelope calculation of the results of a comet's impact. His conclusion: If it hits land it's bad for anyone underneath(!) but most of the energy re-radiates to space. If it hits water (more likely, since the earth's surface is 70% water) most of the energy goes into water vapor--literally boiling the ocean and kicking off a new ice age.
You wrote: That's not google's fault, it's your responsibility to fix broken links.
It most certainly is Google's fault--they could have put in redirects to the new site if they chose to. (According to the OP, it sounds like they tried to, but screwed it up.)
As a website developer, I don't know all the sites that may link to me. Maybe if I know about some I might accomidate the links but most I don't even know about. And to be honest, I don't really care in most case.
If you don't cere if people's links to your site work, why are you bothering to publish a site at all? (Or if you're working for someone else, why are they hiring a "website developer" who doesn't care if visitors can get to their site?)
So you think the government should be able to prevent the New York Times (owned by a huge media corporation) from publishing anything critical of Pesident Bush, right?
Because that's what eliminating first amendment protection for corporations would mean.
No, that's not what I'm saying. The GPL sets the terms for distribution of GPL'd software. That's it--it doesn't effect use at all.
So as an author of PHP software you don't have a problem (unless you want to distribute a package of your software, PHP and MySQL together). People who package distributions do have a problem--they can't legally distribute PHP linked with software that's covered by the GPL. Since MySQL is now GPL, they couldn't legally distribute PHP linked to MySQL libraries.
This is also why libraries like glibc are often licensed with LGPL, which doesn't have this restriction.
I can't believe the parent is mod'ed 5, Insightful! GPL compatibility has nothing to do with whether there's anything in PHP's license that would prevent you from licensing YOUR software that YOU wrote in PHP with GPL. GPL compatible means you can combine a module which was released under that license with a GPL-covered module to make one larger program.
This license is used by most of PHP4. It is a non-copyleft free software license which is incompatible with the GNU GPL.
We recommend that you not use this license for anything except PHP add-ons.
Looking at long list of non-copyleft licenses on that page that are GPL-comnpatible, I wonder why the PHP folks don't work with FSF to make their license compatible, as, for example, the Python developers did.
No AT&T was TDMA (not CDMA) and is in the process of converting to GSM. Cingular is also making the exact same TDMA-to-GSM transition, so there is a good technology fit.
AT&T's TDMA network had great nationwide coverage, and they were the first major provider to offer a nationwide no-roaming plan. My understanding is that their GSM network isn't nearly as good yet.
Vodafone (which is a major provider in Europe, where everyone is GSM) is also a major shareholder in Verizon, which uses CDMA.
Here's the list of the major providers and their network types:
The registration date is October 28, 2003, even though Linus Gazette has been publishing since '95. Sounds like SSC decided to register the trademark only when they realized they had a problem. That registration might be succeptible to challenge.
IANAL, but my understanding is that it's totally up to the the patent holder whether or not to grant a license, and whether to sue to enforce the patent against an infringer.
Furthermore, there's no "use it or lose it" with patents (unlike with trademarks). A patent holder can wait until an infringer is successful before suing.
why not just give HUGE taxbreaks on home generators, to allow people to overbackup their houses, so that the overflow can be pumped into the net?
The short answers: Because the grid can't store the overflow and it makes no economic sense. Steven Den Beste debunks a similar proposal in great detail here with a follow-up here.
Re:Interoperability with MS
on
Opengroupware
·
· Score: 1
But Apache is a "drop-in" replacement for IIS in the sense that existing clients (web browsers) work with it without any changes. That's really important. Few businesses will adopt an open source alternative if it involves converting all their desktops at the same time.
The difficulty is that the reversed chronology you mention means that MS has defined a proprietary interface that it very difficult to implement instead of being based on open standards like HTTP and HTML.
So if ARod was making $75,000 a year, you think the owners would just reduce ticket prices, cable prices and webcast prices out of the goodness of their hearts?
The owners charge what they charge in order to maximize their profits (or minimize their losses). Rest assured that they will continue to do that regardless of what they are paying the players.
Am I the only person who thinks the phrase "software programmers" is awkward and redundant, and that just plain "programmers" sounds a lot better? What other kind of programmers are we likely to be talking about??
Anytime I see "software programmers" I think the person who wrote it doesn't have a clue about anything computer related.
The big problem with bayesian server-side filtering (as opposed to rule-based tools like SpamAssassin) is that baysian filtering requires a UI. The user must classify email as spam/not-spam to provide fodder for the filter. Having that UI in the mail client is the right thing to do. It would be nice if there were some protocol that the client could use to communicate that info to a server-side filter, but AFAIK no such protocol exists.
So client-side seems like the right place for bayesian filtering right now.
First, the theory isn't new. Here's a good article from The Atlantic.
Second, as the article explains, this has apparently happened before with drastic results. (How does a 13 degree Farenheit change in 50 years sound?)
Obviously it can happen due to natural processes. There's also a chance that human-caused warming could kick it off. Either way, the results wouldn't be good.
Actually, I believe that most asteroid threats lie in the plane of the eccliptic, which means you see them coming from pretty much anywhere on the planet.
According to the article, the obit of this asteroid is quite inclined to the ecliptic, which is why it wasn't detected earlier. Anything NOT coming from the plane of the eccliptic is probably interstellar and thus likely moving WAY too fast to get to and divert without some major advances in technology.
Not so. This object is in a high inclination orbit. A southern herisphere observatory might be critical to detecting an object in an orbit that spends most of its time in the southern sky.
Ed Foster's Gripe Line column in InfoWorld coberd this recently. It's a real problem, although you should be able to get your money back, either from the retailer or the software vendor, if you're persistent enough.
When you buy a book, do you need to read a license that says you can't photocopy it and give the copies to your friends, but you are allowed to read it, or sell your copy to a used book store?
No, because copyright law says all of that already.
The GPL doesn't affect how you can use software you purchase at all. All it says is that if you want to distribute it, you have to follow its requirements. If you don't accept them, then your rights are those provided by copyright law and the same as those you have when you buy a book; i.e. you can use it, you can sell your copy but you can't distribute copies to others.
Slashdot Mirror
Sounds about as official as a Slashdot post to me.
We all benefit when companies allow and encouragew their employees to blog. Calling blog posts "official" may sex up a
How about Japan and (West) Germany after World War II? I suppose you could argue that Germany had some experience with democracy between the wars, but democracy was imposed in Japan by the US occupation--no revolution, no democratic tradition.
Larry Niven and Jerry Pournelle's sci-fi novel Lucifer's Hammer has a great scene where the astrophysicist Dan Forrester goes through a back-of-the-envelope calculation of the results of a comet's impact. His conclusion: If it hits land it's bad for anyone underneath(!) but most of the energy re-radiates to space. If it hits water (more likely, since the earth's surface is 70% water) most of the energy goes into water vapor--literally boiling the ocean and kicking off a new ice age.
And in fact, http://groups.google.ca/groups?oi=djq&ic=1&selm=an _638071147 still links the NANAE post.
Tim B-L says Cool URIs don't change.
You wrote:
That's not google's fault, it's your responsibility to fix broken links.
It most certainly is Google's fault--they could have put in redirects to the new site if they chose to. (According to the OP, it sounds like they tried to, but screwed it up.)
As a website developer, I don't know all the sites that may link to me. Maybe if I know about some I might accomidate the links but most I don't even know about. And to be honest, I don't really care in most case.
If you don't cere if people's links to your site work, why are you bothering to publish a site at all? (Or if you're working for someone else, why are they hiring a "website developer" who doesn't care if visitors can get to their site?)
Here are the American Academy of Pediatrics' recommendations.
So you think the government should be able to prevent the New York Times (owned by a huge media corporation) from publishing anything critical of Pesident Bush, right?
Because that's what eliminating first amendment protection for corporations would mean.
No, that's not what I'm saying. The GPL sets the terms for distribution of GPL'd software. That's it--it doesn't effect use at all.
So as an author of PHP software you don't have a problem (unless you want to distribute a package of your software, PHP and MySQL together). People who package distributions do have a problem--they can't legally distribute PHP linked with software that's covered by the GPL. Since MySQL is now GPL, they couldn't legally distribute PHP linked to MySQL libraries.
This is also why libraries like glibc are often licensed with LGPL, which doesn't have this restriction.
The PHP license is NOT GPL compatible, see the GNU license list, which says:
Looking at long list of non-copyleft licenses on that page that are GPL-comnpatible, I wonder why the PHP folks don't work with FSF to make their license compatible, as, for example, the Python developers did.
AT&T's TDMA network had great nationwide coverage, and they were the first major provider to offer a nationwide no-roaming plan. My understanding is that their GSM network isn't nearly as good yet.
Vodafone (which is a major provider in Europe, where everyone is GSM) is also a major shareholder in Verizon, which uses CDMA.
Here's the list of the major providers and their network types:
AT&T TDMA-->GSM Cingular TDMA-->GSM Verizon CDMA Sprint CDMA T-Mobile GSM Nextel iDEN Alltel CDMA US Cellular CDMAThe registration date is October 28, 2003, even though Linus Gazette has been publishing since '95. Sounds like SSC decided to register the trademark only when they realized they had a problem. That registration might be succeptible to challenge.
IANAL, but my understanding is that it's totally up to the the patent holder whether or not to grant a license, and whether to sue to enforce the patent against an infringer.
Furthermore, there's no "use it or lose it" with patents (unlike with trademarks). A patent holder can wait until an infringer is successful before suing.
The short answers: Because the grid can't store the overflow and it makes no economic sense. Steven Den Beste debunks a similar proposal in great detail here
with a follow-up here.
But Apache is a "drop-in" replacement for IIS in the sense that existing clients (web browsers) work with it without any changes. That's really important. Few businesses will adopt an open source alternative if it involves converting all their desktops at the same time.
The difficulty is that the reversed chronology you mention means that MS has defined a proprietary interface that it very difficult to implement instead of being based on open standards like HTTP and HTML.
The Supreme Court ruled yesterday that they can't use tradmark as a form of pseudo-copyright.
Make sure you read the commission minority's dissent to the report:
n t. htm
http://www.usccr.gov/pubs/vote2000/report/disse
So if ARod was making $75,000 a year, you think the owners would just reduce ticket prices, cable prices and webcast prices out of the goodness of their hearts?
The owners charge what they charge in order to maximize their profits (or minimize their losses). Rest assured that they will continue to do that regardless of what they are paying the players.
Am I the only person who thinks the phrase "software programmers" is awkward and redundant, and that just plain "programmers" sounds a lot better? What other kind of programmers are we likely to be talking about??
Anytime I see "software programmers" I think the person who wrote it doesn't have a clue about anything computer related.
Jim
The big problem with bayesian server-side filtering (as opposed to rule-based tools like SpamAssassin) is that baysian filtering requires a UI. The user must classify email as spam/not-spam to provide fodder for the filter. Having that UI in the mail client is the right thing to do. It would be nice if there were some protocol that the client could use to communicate that info to a server-side filter, but AFAIK no such protocol exists.
So client-side seems like the right place for bayesian filtering right now.
Yeah, I hear when Gore was in San Francisco last week, he said the Giants should have won the World Series...
After all, they scored the most runs!
First, the theory isn't new. Here's a good article from The Atlantic.
Second, as the article explains, this has apparently happened before with drastic results. (How does a 13 degree Farenheit change in 50 years sound?)
Obviously it can happen due to natural processes. There's also a chance that human-caused warming could kick it off. Either way, the results wouldn't be good.
Actually, I believe that most asteroid threats lie in the plane of the eccliptic, which means you see them coming from pretty much anywhere on the planet.
According to the article, the obit of this asteroid is quite inclined to the ecliptic, which is why it wasn't detected earlier.
Anything NOT coming from the plane of the eccliptic is probably interstellar and thus likely moving WAY too fast to get to and divert without some major advances in technology.
Not so. This object is in a high inclination orbit. A southern herisphere observatory might be critical to detecting an object in an orbit that spends most of its time in the southern sky.
Ed Foster's Gripe Line column in InfoWorld coberd this recently. It's a real problem, although you should be able to get your money back, either from the retailer or the software vendor, if you're persistent enough.
When you buy a book, do you need to read a license that says you can't photocopy it and give the copies to your friends, but you are allowed to read it, or sell your copy to a used book store?
No, because copyright law says all of that already.
The GPL doesn't affect how you can use software you purchase at all. All it says is that if you want to distribute it, you have to follow its requirements. If you don't accept them, then your rights are those provided by copyright law and the same as those you have when you buy a book; i.e. you can use it, you can sell your copy but you can't distribute copies to others.