You should check out the next generation of search engine to see how that problem can be effectively solved.
Re:Google hacks a better option...
on
Web Search Garage
·
· Score: 1
For example, I punched 802.11a on vivisimo.com, and it gave me page-rank-style hits on the right, but (here's the good part) in a left nav it gave me a tree view:
802.11a (171)
Wireless LAN (46)
Wireless Networking (28)
Reviews (21)
Access Point (22)
Compare (15)
Solutions (10)
Dual, Band (8)
Antennas, Wireless Internet Radio, Amplifiers (5)
White Papers (8)
Router, Netgear (5) More
I'm running under an epistemology which differentiates between many classes of propositions, organizing them into various conjoint and disjoint classes. Among these classes are known facts of experience, at varying levels of confidence depending on the nature of the experience and its relation to the structure of the proposition. Science Fiction is a form of authorship in which a narrative is invented which is futuristic or highly speculatively historical in time, or involves as a crucial element some hypothesized advanced or alternative technology. You don't use scientific method to discuss current events any more than you do to make a legal or a moral argument, and my personal knowledge of this peculiar academic project being conducted with the support of federal grant monies is in no way scientific. Rather, it is historical in nature. As such, the "soul of science" (thank you, James Brown) is irrelevant to it. Scientific epistemology is but a sliver of the larger pie of epistemology, which includes social and personal forms of historical knowledge within its scope. It's not possible for a narrative to be science fiction if it is not fiction. In sum, I consider your statements hyperbolic and soundly refuted, the evident product of an unreasonably narrow view of epistemic method.
> The post you responded to lays it out explicitly: > in order to distribute a program that contains a > patented bit of code, you must have a free > license for that code that allows redistribution.
Oh certainly. I don't doubt that. But it's not pertinent whether the code is distributed in source form or in binary form.
actually its status is operational. it's not burning away the ozone, it's creating ozone. just because you never saw a yak doesn't mean they're "science fiction". your epistemology needs a touch-up, bro.
I still don't see anything that, singly, or in combination, precludes distributing unlicensed patent implementations under the terms of the GPL. In fact, I'm sure it happens all the time.
No, you can't. Which is very interesting in itself. You should see the mercury mirror room. When he goes inside, he uses a sniffer box and wears a moon suit. Running the laser puts a gob of mercury into the room's air. I have no idea how they dispose of it -- perhaps zeolite filters.
Ansari X-Prize terms state that the pilot must survive at least 24 hours after re-entry. If the price on Osama bin Laden's head is 2.5 M$US, then the price on that pilot's head right now is 4x greater. I'd advise him to stay away from DaVinci staffers.
I don't know the terms of the GPL well enough to comment, but in general there is nothing about open source that implies a license to patents which it implements.
Not only did we reduce CFC emissions dramatically, here in the U.S., but now we are actually taking proactive steps to restore the Ozone in depleted polar regions. I have a friend in Alaska, a physics post-doc, who operates an enormous laser designed to produce ozone. He was stationed in Antarctica until a few months ago.
You haven't tried to discriminate between my zhao and wo. Spelling errors are entirely possible in Chinese. Each character is composed of a set of strokes, and the repetoire of strokes is fairly small. Substituting a hooked vertical for a straight vertical, or a narrow horizontal for a wide horizontal, will change the meaning and pronounciation of the character.
It is irrelevant to the patent infringement issue whether your code is open or closed. If you negotiated a license for a patent, and that license did not specifically preclude it, there would be nothing to prevent you from releasing it as open source code.
Emulator glitch works I've seen are a pale foreshadowing of the real meat of glitch art: Mpeg-4 artifacts. I've got an AVI of the Hong Kong classic movie, Hard Boiled, with just over 3 minutes of continuous multimedia glitchtasia that feels like a 500 ug LSD trip played back at 200x. It's the visual equivalent of the brilliant remix of Space Oddity that resulted from my first buggy fixed-point implementation of MPEG-2 Layer 3 audio for PPC 1.0 a few years ago.
> Java was mostly geared to be a variant of Smalltalk (1978) with C-like syntax.
You seem to have mistakenly mentioned 'Java' when you meant to say 'Objective-C'. Java's static typing and lack of closures makes it much more like C++ than Smalltalk, both semantically, and in application. If I were tracing the roots of Java, I would draw a line through C++ straight to Simula (1962-1967). Reading and writing Java code is much more like reading and writing Simula than Smalltalk.
Agreed. I used to complain about C++ bloat, and the way it turned every program into a performance dog. Java became the ruling paradigm, and continually pushed the envelope of gratuitous bloat, and managed to make current user interfaces sluggish until the hardware caught up. But C# out does even the antique 1.2 JRE (which was a high water mark for Java resource consumption, but could be run comfortably on a 400MHz K6-2). Just two small C# programs running simultaneously on a 3GHz P4 laptop are sufficient to bring the system to an intermittent crawl, so it's no surprise that Microsoft tells us multiple 3GHz cores and a gigabyte of RAM are needed to run their next generation OS.
If I were cynical, I'd conclude that Intel had suckered Microsoft into C# by some clever connaivance, to justify new hardware sales. Or perhaps Infineon. It certainly seems as though Microsoft is shooting itself in the foot to spite the marathon, with dotnet.
I can't imagine why anyone would use Mono when it can be ripped out from under you by Microsoft's patent attorneys at any moment, and the alternatives are so superior. For example, gcj, or Ruby's GTK and Gnome or QT and KDE bindings.
While C# and dotnet get enormous amounts of PR hype, they really don't amount to much in the real world, where the platform lock-in and enormous bloat that dotnet entails spell doom.
I think the classical use of the word is with reference to violence which targets non-combatants. As a result, it excludes all military actions except for war crimes.
furthermore, the most effective laser for blinding targets will not use visible spectrum.
but really, the ranges of frequencies to be protected against are easily determined, and using monochrome filters in a relatively safe frequency, in conjunction with lcd shut-off would be pretty darn laser-safe. of course you'd look like a dipstick in your welding helment, and everything would be black-and-white, but thems the breaks.
Slashdot Mirror
Exploitation is different from displacement. If not, your "5.7 liter V8" would be called a "57 dead Iraqi V8".
Well, okay, the last American ever to go into space (Capitalize Me? WTF?!) alone, where space means the set of points more than 103 km above sealevel.
You should check out the next generation of search engine to see how that problem can be effectively solved.
For example, I punched 802.11a on vivisimo.com, and it gave me page-rank-style hits on the right, but (here's the good part) in a left nav it gave me a tree view:
802.11a (171)
Wireless LAN (46)
Wireless Networking (28)
Reviews (21)
Access Point (22)
Compare (15)
Solutions (10)
Dual, Band (8)
Antennas, Wireless Internet Radio, Amplifiers (5)
White Papers (8)
Router, Netgear (5)
More
Don't take it too seriously. It just means your post pushed some random geek's mean button.
It's called Karma, not Justice, and that for a reason.
I'm running under an epistemology which differentiates between many classes of propositions, organizing them into various conjoint and disjoint classes. Among these classes are known facts of experience, at varying levels of confidence depending on the nature of the experience and its relation to the structure of the proposition. Science Fiction is a form of authorship in which a narrative is invented which is futuristic or highly speculatively historical in time, or involves as a crucial element some hypothesized advanced or alternative technology. You don't use scientific method to discuss current events any more than you do to make a legal or a moral argument, and my personal knowledge of this peculiar academic project being conducted with the support of federal grant monies is in no way scientific. Rather, it is historical in nature. As such, the "soul of science" (thank you, James Brown) is irrelevant to it. Scientific epistemology is but a sliver of the larger pie of epistemology, which includes social and personal forms of historical knowledge within its scope. It's not possible for a narrative to be science fiction if it is not fiction. In sum, I consider your statements hyperbolic and soundly refuted, the evident product of an unreasonably narrow view of epistemic method.
> The post you responded to lays it out explicitly:
> in order to distribute a program that contains a
> patented bit of code, you must have a free
> license for that code that allows redistribution.
Oh certainly. I don't doubt that. But it's not pertinent whether the code is distributed in source
form or in binary form.
actually its status is operational. it's not burning away the ozone, it's creating ozone.
just because you never saw a yak doesn't mean they're "science fiction". your epistemology needs a touch-up, bro.
I still don't see anything that, singly, or in combination, precludes distributing unlicensed patent implementations under the terms of the GPL.
In fact, I'm sure it happens all the time.
No, you can't. Which is very interesting in itself. You should see the mercury mirror room. When he goes inside, he uses a sniffer box and wears a moon suit. Running the laser puts a gob of mercury into the room's air. I have no idea how they dispose of it -- perhaps zeolite filters.
Ansari X-Prize terms state that the pilot must survive at least 24 hours after re-entry. If the price on Osama bin Laden's head is 2.5 M$US, then the price on that pilot's head right now is 4x greater. I'd advise him to stay away from DaVinci staffers.
I don't know the terms of the GPL well enough to comment, but in general there is nothing about open source that implies a license to patents which it implements.
Not only did we reduce CFC emissions dramatically, here in the U.S., but now we are actually taking proactive steps to restore the Ozone in depleted polar regions. I have a friend in Alaska, a physics post-doc, who operates an enormous laser designed to produce ozone. He was stationed in Antarctica until a few months ago.
If they were to be accurate, they would call themselves dictionaries of the predominant North American language.
You haven't tried to discriminate between my zhao and wo. Spelling errors are entirely possible in Chinese. Each character is composed of a set of strokes, and the repetoire of strokes is fairly small. Substituting a hooked vertical for a straight vertical, or a narrow horizontal for a wide horizontal, will change the meaning and pronounciation of the character.
It is irrelevant to the patent infringement issue whether your code is open or closed. If you negotiated a license for a patent, and that license did not specifically preclude it, there would be nothing to prevent you from releasing it as open source code.
You are right. No clothes on the emperor. Move along.
Emulator glitch works I've seen are a pale foreshadowing of the real meat of glitch art: Mpeg-4 artifacts. I've got an AVI of the Hong Kong classic movie, Hard Boiled, with just over 3 minutes of continuous multimedia glitchtasia that feels like a 500 ug LSD trip played back at 200x.
It's the visual equivalent of the brilliant remix of Space Oddity that resulted from my first buggy fixed-point implementation of MPEG-2 Layer 3 audio for PPC 1.0 a few years ago.
> Java was mostly geared to be a variant of Smalltalk (1978) with C-like syntax.
You seem to have mistakenly mentioned 'Java' when
you meant to say 'Objective-C'. Java's static
typing and lack of closures makes it much more like
C++ than Smalltalk, both semantically, and in application. If I were tracing the roots of Java, I would draw a line through C++ straight to Simula (1962-1967). Reading and writing Java code is much more like reading and writing Simula than Smalltalk.
Agreed. I used to complain about C++ bloat, and the way it turned every program into a performance dog. Java became the ruling paradigm, and continually pushed the envelope of gratuitous bloat, and managed to make current user interfaces sluggish until the hardware caught up. But C# out does even the antique 1.2 JRE (which was a high water mark for Java resource consumption, but could be run comfortably on a 400MHz K6-2). Just two small C# programs running simultaneously on a 3GHz P4 laptop are sufficient to bring the system to an intermittent crawl, so it's no surprise that Microsoft tells us multiple 3GHz cores and a gigabyte of RAM are needed to run their next generation OS.
If I were cynical, I'd conclude that Intel had suckered Microsoft into C# by some clever connaivance, to justify new hardware sales. Or perhaps Infineon. It certainly seems as though Microsoft is shooting itself in the foot to spite the marathon, with dotnet.
Or for powering your UFO.
I can't imagine why anyone would use Mono when it can be ripped out from under you by Microsoft's patent attorneys at any moment, and the alternatives are so superior. For example, gcj, or
Ruby's GTK and Gnome or QT and KDE bindings.
While C# and dotnet get enormous amounts of PR hype, they really don't amount to much in the real world, where the platform lock-in and enormous bloat that dotnet entails spell doom.
I think the classical use of the word is with reference to violence which targets non-combatants.
As a result, it excludes all military actions except for war crimes.
>Why do you hate freedom?
Because it clogs your arteries.
furthermore, the most effective laser for blinding targets will not use visible spectrum.
but really, the ranges of frequencies to be protected against are easily determined, and using monochrome filters in a relatively safe frequency, in conjunction with lcd shut-off would be pretty darn laser-safe. of course you'd look like a dipstick in your welding helment, and everything would be black-and-white, but thems the breaks.