Interesting comparison comes from world of chess, where the reconrding of moves can _not_ be copyrighted (because nobody could then play those moves again), but the comments on those moves (like in a book) _can_ be.
That is an interesting analogy and would probably be useful in deciding patent problems. Consider:
Programs are similiar to chess moves. There may be more than one way to get something done but that doesn't preclude two people from independantly coming up with the same sequence. Should the first person to come up with a solution - that is typically not innovative but, rather, an obvious method of solving the programming dilemma - be allowed to patent the entire method or, instead, be allowed to only patent the particular sequence of code? This would allow someone else to innovate on said code and come up with a better solution.
How is a sequence of chess moves different than a program? Both are used by the creator to make money. Both require thought, innovation, and skill. Both can be improved upon by someone else. The main difference, I see, is that a program can be copyrighted or patented (not even the program - just the IDEA of the program implemented.) Patents should cover the implementation so that the code is published and other can innovate based on it. Just like all other inventions out there...
Bluetooth, when properly implemented, is great. It's not designed to be the only wireless protocol: It's narrowly designed to do one thing. Replace wires. That, it does well.
The original poster was complaining because the headset for his phone would not work over 10ft away. I have headsets with wires longer than that and they work just fine.
Are you sure Bluetooth can replace wires extremely well? Obviously in this case, the wire the customer wanted replaced couldn't be done with Bluetooth...
If designers and companies try to use Bluetooth for networking beyond the workable range then it isn't gonna work. Customers don't give a crap how their wireless headset works, they just want it to work.
Does just using GPL software really mean you have to distribute the source? Could Linksys claim that they are not, in fact, distributing GPL code in any form, but are actually just using GPL software in their hardware?
Gimme a break, no one is going to believe that. As soon as they know what code is "dirty", if it even is, it is going to be removed.
Who is the "no one" that you speak of? You? Those reading./ ? The same people that said Microsoft would be punished for being a monopolist and abusing that power? The same people that, just days ago, said there was no code? But now that there may be code it doesn't matter anyways?
If SCO can show that IBM improperly moved code in to Linux, I think a judge would be apt to believe that IBM did not act properly. Does this hurt Linux? Probably - atleast from a credibility stance and migration into corporations. Even with the code removed there is still the chance that some other company will lay claim to code - who has time to go through all that source. Is a corporation just going to accept that the same hackers which wrote Linux are going to make sure the code is clean?
The online group aspect of UoPhx is the best and worst part of the whole experience. I've been taking classes there for over a year now and I have come to the conclusion that people are idiots - and working with them is hell.
The material is good - if you want the education and are willing to put in the effort it is there for you. Just the same as any university. Just the same as any university, you could skate and pass, but not know more than when you started. It still depends on how much effort you put into it - professors will be lazy in the "real world" as well.
The group aspect, though, is painful. Working online with people that haven't a clue how to work a computer is tiring. The best that could be said for it, though, is that you really learn to work with people that you otherwise wouldn't. Now, that may not sound fun, but developing that skill could be very useful in the future.
UoPhx is expensive (thankfully it is covered by other sources) so shopping around may be a good idea. Discounting the degree because of the online aspect or lazy teachers or lazy students, though, is something that will need to be addressed because online education - once a lot of advances (like the video streaming mentioned by avs 007) will probably be the wave of the future.
Isn't EQ filled to the brim with "scripted quests"? Haven't we seen numerous/. articles about instances where the players deviated from the approved quest and were banned - and other players rejoiced because those that didn't follow the rules were punished?
For that matter - isn't this somewhat similar to Anarchy Online's quest system?
This was the way that the semiconductor industry worked as well - if it was on the truck it counted as revenue. Things have changed recently thanks to SAB 101 which, basically, makes it so that revenue isn't counted until the customer accepts the product and pays for it.
How novel - you don't count the money until you get it. I just love accounting...being accounting, though, means that there are still exceptions and "interpretations" of the rules...
Re:Suggestion for version 2.0
on
PeltierBeer
·
· Score: 1
have it send a page or IM to your wife to bring you another before you finish the first one.
Obviously you aren't married if you think someone would have time to a) make this device in the first place and b) actually get the second beer if, upon making said device, you actually paged your wife for more beer.
Re:12v Power Over CAT5?
on
PeltierBeer
·
· Score: 1
Would it have been better if he used WiFi to send that power?
Good greif, is this another game depending on client security? (Design flaw - the client will be hacked by somebody in this kind of game and your game should be designed to cope.)
This is the mantra of every armchair game designer out there. Thanks to Raph everyone thinks they could be a better designer.
Yet every online game that comes out has a hack in the client! I promise you that SWG will have one as well - despite the fact that Raph works on it.
That's more of a point than 'Only one? They probably have two!' which is just blatant trolling.
I don't think that was trolling. His point was that no matter how secure the product appears to be, there is most likely an exploit or hole that hasn't been found. I OpenBSD's case that would double the number of holes in the default install.
Of course, the whole thing could be a joke that slipped through since "If you want to use slashdot as a forum for anti-OpenBSD trolling, point out that the default install does pretty much nothing" sounds more like a troll.
On a related note, you might also want to check out Thomas Pynchon. When I read Gravity's Rainbow I was blown away by the symbolism and imagery of the book, while at the same time laughing out loud at the humor. Mason & Dixon was excellent as well.
For some reason, Wolfe's and Stephenson's writing style reminded me of Pynchon in a way. The section in the bookstore may be completely different but the attention to detail is there.
Also, don't most sane firewall operators have port 79 blocked already? This would also require all those people that put NAT "firewalls" on their plug-n-play broadband connection to figure out how to open a port (and just one, for all of our sakes) to send and receive email. I think it would be easier to just rewrite the whole shebang...
By licensing the offending code, Microsoft is essentially backing SCO up here by saying "They have a legitimate claim on this code and should be paid licensing fees."
But SCO has claimed that Linux contains offending code, not any old operating system under the sun. Does this mean that Microsoft has used Linux code somewhere and, if so, when will the source be released?
This isn't about a business model (I don't think anyone would argue with the idea that searching for lyrics *may* lead to increased sales); this is about copyright. Someone wrote that song and owns the copyright to it - you can't just republish a copyrighted work just because you think it may be in the best interest of the other party. We (meaning: consumers) could argue all day about how beneficial, retarded, ignorant, etc. the practice may be, but that doesn't change the fact that the copyright owner (or that person's representative) has the right to control how his or her work is published.
Also, I don't believe it is "fair use" to completely publish and make searchable someone's copyrighted work. What *may* be fairuse, and probably a much smarter way to do it, would be to have all of the lyrics searcable but only display the line or snippet containing the search term, along with the title. It's probably a patent waiting to happen (searchable database of copyrighted works and a means to access said database without violating copyright owner rights.)
Slashdot is meant to be a community. Not everyone in a community has the same knowledge. Questions that are simple for you may be difficult for someone else.
But questions that have already been asked in Ask Slashdot deserve to be ridiculed to the fullest extent possible in an online community. Part of being a community is not just looking for quick, simple answers that you are too lazy to find for yourself.
Of course, part of the "Slashdot community" is submitting and griping about double posts, so I guess this one just falls right inline with everything else.
For the record: Ask Slashdot is the most useful when the questions actually require thought, opinion, and input from the "community".
The actual release date for the DVD with the theatrical version of the movie is august 26th, 8/26, not June 28th, 6/28.
Hope that helps.
Helps what? Rip out my heart, stomp on it, and pour salt all over it? The release quickly went from 2 months away to 4 in the time it took me to click "read more"!!
Now I might as well wait for the Extended-Super-Delux edition...
A manager who can keep us working happily by filtering innane problems to us rather than having us spend 100% of the time helping people move their mouse is the only way to keep us from jumping ship. And having the manager communicate our needs in the marketing speak that we don't have is the only way to get us our toys so we are happy in our jobs.
I wonder where the idea that techies are prima donnas came from.
Seriously. How long do you think you will be able to have your job if all your demands are met, which basically boil down to "let me do whatever I want, give me toys, and don't talk to me." People bitch about CEO's stealing from the coffers (rightly so) while the company goes under and everyone else loses their 401K's and, instead of wanting to make things right, they want to do just same on a lower scale.
Here's an idea: do your job. Voice concerns to management; grow up enough to communicate what you *need* (i.e. not Nerf darts) to do your job, why it benefits the company and how it will increase quality in the company (not your "quality" time with the Game Cube, either.)
I'll get modded down for this I'm sure, but making unrealistic demands does not make techies look better or help; this isn't like bargaining for a car where you can start ridiculous and work towards common ground. Learn how to explain what you need, why, and the benefits in a way that people who don't do your job can understand. It really isn't that hard.
From a layman's perspective it appears that the biggest problem is that people just don't understand XML and what it is used for (I admit that I don't.) So, while a document may be XML-compliant, from what have seen, it isn't necessarily readable by any other program.
If the data it not readable by any other program then, yes, that is pretty useless as far as data lifetime is concerned. Does this data, though, differentiate from content and presentation? Is it important to know exactly how the data is to be presented or important only to have the content?
From a *user* viewpoint I would have to say that, if someone else can not view the data exactly as I want them to, then it is useless. This doesn't mean that the other person has to look at the content this way, just that it should be possible. If the XML document can specify this - the content, the fonts, the headings, the layout, etc. - and this data can interpreted by other programs then, yes, that would be useful. Just getting the content is not that useful (you can open a Word document in a text editor and pull out the content; oddly enough, saving a document in OpenOffice.org format can't be read in a text editor...hhmmm)
It's just not true. XML is *NOT* 'just' a presentation format, a la HTML (nice smear), nor is it 'inevitable' that the fileformat ends up like Postscript.
So wait a second - the original post stated that XML is ALL about the content and specifically NOT the presentation. Now you are saying that XML is apparently *self documenting* and the USER decides how the content should be displayed.
So, according to your post, Microsoft is correct when their XML file output includes the *content* and the *user* can display it however they want.
Slashdot Mirror
That is an interesting analogy and would probably be useful in deciding patent problems. Consider:
Programs are similiar to chess moves. There may be more than one way to get something done but that doesn't preclude two people from independantly coming up with the same sequence. Should the first person to come up with a solution - that is typically not innovative but, rather, an obvious method of solving the programming dilemma - be allowed to patent the entire method or, instead, be allowed to only patent the particular sequence of code? This would allow someone else to innovate on said code and come up with a better solution.
How is a sequence of chess moves different than a program? Both are used by the creator to make money. Both require thought, innovation, and skill. Both can be improved upon by someone else. The main difference, I see, is that a program can be copyrighted or patented (not even the program - just the IDEA of the program implemented.) Patents should cover the implementation so that the code is published and other can innovate based on it. Just like all other inventions out there...
The original poster was complaining because the headset for his phone would not work over 10ft away. I have headsets with wires longer than that and they work just fine.
Are you sure Bluetooth can replace wires extremely well? Obviously in this case, the wire the customer wanted replaced couldn't be done with Bluetooth...
If designers and companies try to use Bluetooth for networking beyond the workable range then it isn't gonna work. Customers don't give a crap how their wireless headset works, they just want it to work.
Does just using GPL software really mean you have to distribute the source? Could Linksys claim that they are not, in fact, distributing GPL code in any form, but are actually just using GPL software in their hardware?
Who is the "no one" that you speak of? You? Those reading ./ ? The same people that said Microsoft would be punished for being a monopolist and abusing that power? The same people that, just days ago, said there was no code? But now that there may be code it doesn't matter anyways?
If SCO can show that IBM improperly moved code in to Linux, I think a judge would be apt to believe that IBM did not act properly. Does this hurt Linux? Probably - atleast from a credibility stance and migration into corporations. Even with the code removed there is still the chance that some other company will lay claim to code - who has time to go through all that source. Is a corporation just going to accept that the same hackers which wrote Linux are going to make sure the code is clean?
This opens the door to a lot of questions...
The material is good - if you want the education and are willing to put in the effort it is there for you. Just the same as any university. Just the same as any university, you could skate and pass, but not know more than when you started. It still depends on how much effort you put into it - professors will be lazy in the "real world" as well.
The group aspect, though, is painful. Working online with people that haven't a clue how to work a computer is tiring. The best that could be said for it, though, is that you really learn to work with people that you otherwise wouldn't. Now, that may not sound fun, but developing that skill could be very useful in the future.
UoPhx is expensive (thankfully it is covered by other sources) so shopping around may be a good idea. Discounting the degree because of the online aspect or lazy teachers or lazy students, though, is something that will need to be addressed because online education - once a lot of advances (like the video streaming mentioned by avs 007) will probably be the wave of the future.
It can run with only 12MB by they recommend, strongly, that you have 768!?! Does that not seem like a very large range to everyone else?
Looks like someone will be buying a copy of WinXP today!
For that matter - isn't this somewhat similar to Anarchy Online's quest system?
How novel - you don't count the money until you get it. I just love accounting...being accounting, though, means that there are still exceptions and "interpretations" of the rules...
Obviously you aren't married if you think someone would have time to a) make this device in the first place and b) actually get the second beer if, upon making said device, you actually paged your wife for more beer.
Would it have been better if he used WiFi to send that power?
This is the mantra of every armchair game designer out there. Thanks to Raph everyone thinks they could be a better designer.
Yet every online game that comes out has a hack in the client! I promise you that SWG will have one as well - despite the fact that Raph works on it.
So which billionaire Chinese man is going to buy this and raise thousands of orphan girls to raise into a karate-kicking, boot-toting army?
I don't think that was trolling. His point was that no matter how secure the product appears to be, there is most likely an exploit or hole that hasn't been found. I OpenBSD's case that would double the number of holes in the default install.
Of course, the whole thing could be a joke that slipped through since "If you want to use slashdot as a forum for anti-OpenBSD trolling, point out that the default install does pretty much nothing" sounds more like a troll.
On a related note, you might also want to check out Thomas Pynchon. When I read Gravity's Rainbow I was blown away by the symbolism and imagery of the book, while at the same time laughing out loud at the humor. Mason & Dixon was excellent as well.
For some reason, Wolfe's and Stephenson's writing style reminded me of Pynchon in a way. The section in the bookstore may be completely different but the attention to detail is there.
Rand al'Thor
(Nothing happens. Then, nothing happens. Then, unexpectedly, nothing happens. Everything is FRAUGHT with PORTENT.)Moiraine
Everybody (They travel a LOT. Something happens that isn't explained. Something happens that doesn't make sense. Something happens.)Rand al'Thor
THE (predictable, cliched, dumb) END
Fans
Also, don't most sane firewall operators have port 79 blocked already? This would also require all those people that put NAT "firewalls" on their plug-n-play broadband connection to figure out how to open a port (and just one, for all of our sakes) to send and receive email. I think it would be easier to just rewrite the whole shebang...
But SCO has claimed that Linux contains offending code, not any old operating system under the sun. Does this mean that Microsoft has used Linux code somewhere and, if so, when will the source be released?
This isn't about a business model (I don't think anyone would argue with the idea that searching for lyrics *may* lead to increased sales); this is about copyright. Someone wrote that song and owns the copyright to it - you can't just republish a copyrighted work just because you think it may be in the best interest of the other party. We (meaning: consumers) could argue all day about how beneficial, retarded, ignorant, etc. the practice may be, but that doesn't change the fact that the copyright owner (or that person's representative) has the right to control how his or her work is published.
Also, I don't believe it is "fair use" to completely publish and make searchable someone's copyrighted work. What *may* be fairuse, and probably a much smarter way to do it, would be to have all of the lyrics searcable but only display the line or snippet containing the search term, along with the title. It's probably a patent waiting to happen (searchable database of copyrighted works and a means to access said database without violating copyright owner rights.)
So Apple is once again mimicking Microsoft, huh? They couldn't keep up with "patch Tuesday" so they came up with "new music". Pfftt...
But questions that have already been asked in Ask Slashdot deserve to be ridiculed to the fullest extent possible in an online community. Part of being a community is not just looking for quick, simple answers that you are too lazy to find for yourself.
Of course, part of the "Slashdot community" is submitting and griping about double posts, so I guess this one just falls right inline with everything else.
For the record: Ask Slashdot is the most useful when the questions actually require thought, opinion, and input from the "community".
Hope that helps.
Helps what? Rip out my heart, stomp on it, and pour salt all over it? The release quickly went from 2 months away to 4 in the time it took me to click "read more"!!
Now I might as well wait for the Extended-Super-Delux edition...
I wonder where the idea that techies are prima donnas came from.
Seriously. How long do you think you will be able to have your job if all your demands are met, which basically boil down to "let me do whatever I want, give me toys, and don't talk to me." People bitch about CEO's stealing from the coffers (rightly so) while the company goes under and everyone else loses their 401K's and, instead of wanting to make things right, they want to do just same on a lower scale.
Here's an idea: do your job. Voice concerns to management; grow up enough to communicate what you *need* (i.e. not Nerf darts) to do your job, why it benefits the company and how it will increase quality in the company (not your "quality" time with the Game Cube, either.)
I'll get modded down for this I'm sure, but making unrealistic demands does not make techies look better or help; this isn't like bargaining for a car where you can start ridiculous and work towards common ground. Learn how to explain what you need, why, and the benefits in a way that people who don't do your job can understand. It really isn't that hard.
From a layman's perspective it appears that the biggest problem is that people just don't understand XML and what it is used for (I admit that I don't.) So, while a document may be XML-compliant, from what have seen, it isn't necessarily readable by any other program.
If the data it not readable by any other program then, yes, that is pretty useless as far as data lifetime is concerned. Does this data, though, differentiate from content and presentation? Is it important to know exactly how the data is to be presented or important only to have the content?
From a *user* viewpoint I would have to say that, if someone else can not view the data exactly as I want them to, then it is useless. This doesn't mean that the other person has to look at the content this way, just that it should be possible. If the XML document can specify this - the content, the fonts, the headings, the layout, etc. - and this data can interpreted by other programs then, yes, that would be useful. Just getting the content is not that useful (you can open a Word document in a text editor and pull out the content; oddly enough, saving a document in OpenOffice.org format can't be read in a text editor...hhmmm)
So wait a second - the original post stated that XML is ALL about the content and specifically NOT the presentation. Now you are saying that XML is apparently *self documenting* and the USER decides how the content should be displayed.
So, according to your post, Microsoft is correct when their XML file output includes the *content* and the *user* can display it however they want.