I drove my mother's car about five miles today, with the burglar alarm sounding, and the hazard lights flashing. Everyone stared, nobody stopped me.
There was some fault on the car, either the battery, alternator, or immobiliser (still in the garage being diagnosed), that meant that it wouldn't start, and whenever the doors were opened the alarm was activated.
So I drove it to the dealership in this state, alarm blaring, hazards flashing.
At one point, (not being used to the clutch cutoff point), I even stalled it. With the alarm still sounding, a friendly couple in an Audi helped me to bumpstart the car to get it going again.
No questions asked, just being helpful.
That was just after a police car had passed in the opposite direction, without even batting an eyelid.
So, no cameras, just people - general public and police - are not prepared to get involved when such a crime may be taking place. As I say, everyone was interested - I've not had so much attention for a while now - but even the police were not prepared to intervene.
If two police won't take on a lone car-theft in person, what good's a camera? The car wasn't reported stolen, so even automation wouldn't help.
I would have felt a lot better about the police and the general public if somebody had made some attempt to stop me, or even just question my motives.
When nobody cares that a crime is (apparently) being committed - including the police - what's the point?
Of course real coppers would do the deterrent job more efficiently than a camera, and I've never seen a camera, by itself, spot a crime about to take place, use its intelligence, and stop it from happening. Coppers cost more money than cameras, though, and if I was going to get valid evidence in a violent situation, I'd rather risk a camera than a person's life.
This is a totally valid question, and it is why such cameras can only be tolerated in democracies, where there is stated "ownership" of every camera. Here in the UK, it's the Home Office.
Even if I don't like them, and voted against their party, then I cannot say that I do not know who is controlling it. See my rant about Speed Cameras.
BTW: As it happens, I just might have voted for this current UK gov't....
If if were not for video evidence, the American police in the Rodney King "incident" would still be doing the same today.
That surely is reason enough. This is not police/state vs. innocent public, but the monitoring of the police.
The cameras used in Police-Camera-Action!, and similar "look-you-can-be-caught-if-you're-bad" TV shows record everything that police car does... This is monitoring how they do their job, not just spying on citizens.
As a British Citizen, I can tell you all that speed cameras are the real problem over here, not high-street or shopping-mall cameras. I have addressed these in another post. ("But crime in Britain has skyrocketted")
Speed cameras are what the public really hate. Road Rage is getting to be a serious problem over the past few years - no computer yet built can detect bad driving or discourtesy. What they can check is speed (there have been disputes over the system's accuracy to do this). Therefore, passing a 56mph lorry on a 60mph road can land you with a fine if you go over 60mph to overtake. Even if this is the safer option. Enough of these (4?) and you lose your license.
These pictures, unlike CCTV, are taken as proof. Also, there has been controversy over the method in which this evidence is applied.
You basically receive a letter stating that "your vehicle was doing XX mph in a YY mph area. If you were not the driver, you must identify the driver or be prosecuted for the offence yourself". (words to that effect). This removes the right to not incriminate oneself. You must either incriminate someone else, or admit to the offence. There is no option given to dispute the claim.
For any other crime/offence I would have the right to remain silent because my actions may incriminate me. In this one case, I have to either confess or name the person who was driving my car at that time.
Scottish law has seen this folly, and revised their law (they now have their own Parliament). For the UK, Wales and Ireland, however, this ridiculous system remains in place.
That's the real problem with cameras - when they are taken more seriously than genuine safety issues.
As a British citizen, I can confirm that we do have CCTV (Closed-Circuit TV) in most shopping centres, etc. Also on many high streets.
Particular forms of crime (pickpocketing, mugging, etc) has tended to have slowed due to the introduction of cameras in a given area.
However, after a while, the habitual petty criminals have realised that the results are low, mainly because the images are blurry and cannot normally, by themselves, stand up in court.
Catching and convicting is not the only aspect, of course. If two people can watch 20 cameras, and two are on the street, that's four staff with the effictiveness of twenty. That's a significant saving in public spending.
This applies mainly to day-time crimes (pickpocketing, etc), but at closing time this can aid police effectiveness massively. (Yes, we have draconian alcohol laws over here!)
I'm currently working on an article -the draft is available at http://steve-parker.org/articles/camera/camera.sht ml (also try camera2.shtml and camera3.shtml).
This is an attempt to show end-users that they make valid, conscious choices between a point-and-click camera, and a state-of-the-art camera. That they feel empowered to do so, that they do not feel any need to bow down to some dumbest level, but feel no shame in the point-and-click camera if that's what suits them.
It's not a very coherent article at the moment, but the idea's there, and developing.
New Story: 1970s Newsflash
A radical new paper-industry company, known to insiders as "Xerox", are now in court against a coalition of publishers, including Mills&Boon, Future Publishing, Penguin, Black Swan.
It appears that the Xerox corporation are planning to introduce a radical new machine, which they claim will soon be commenplace in offices around the world. This new machine will be capable of making accurate paper copies of any book, magazine, or other publication ever made, without any payment being made to the original publisher or author.
It has been suggested that in thirty years' time, it would be possible for Xerox users to use the same technique to copy movies for their own private use.
Surely the whole world must be united in stopping the evil Xerox corporation.
The way forward is to show that it is incorrect to have the encryption, but that it is okay for the copyright owners to enforce their copyright, within reason.
I can publish a book for $5.99, and get $5.99 a copy (less costs - let's say $1), or make a PDF (encrypted) available for $4.99 (a la Adobe's new idea), or make a.txt or unenecrypted PDF available for $0.00......
I'd go for the highest profit, not the best deal for the consumer, were I a publisher.
I do acknowledge the MPAA's goals here - they are entitled to cash for movies. The question is how they get it. Encryption shouldn't be an issue - I can photocopy a book, tape-to-tape a VHS tape, burn an audio CD onto a CDR; I expect the same ability with DVD. And this is, to the consumer, where it hangs. It may or may not ne legal, but I have always had the ability to make my own copies (for legal or illegal purposes), and now the MPAA are trying to remove this ability, regardless of my intent. Better encryption is not the issue at all - it's enforcement of copyright, which, when using technology to make the copies, is impossible without artifical intelligence.
My PC, or any other device, is not able to make an accurate legal judgement of whether or not I am allowed, under my local law, to make the copy I am requesting of it. Even if it could, it would still be trivial to circumvent. So technological protection is duff by defenition.
We should just make it tricky, like Sony et al already do... they sell VCRs which are capable of breaking copyright law, but then make sure that the general public are so scared/incapable of programming them, that they do not achieve the desired results.
The public issuing of a Windows-only, poor-quality, DVD copying software, approved by the MPAA, would be their best solution here, as far as I can see. It would mean all that Napster and VHS really achieves - get a poor quality copy, or buy the real thing. Leave DeCSS users alone, so long as they don't make this kind of thing available to AOL users.
Re:The article doesn't say much.
on
eWeek on Linux
·
· Score: 1
Mission Critical is summed up quite well in the article:
Linux is clearly enterprise-ready at the server level for certain applications like e-mail, e-commerce and Web servers, but he said it lags with regard to running other mission-critical applications like financials and CRM.
I'd much more happily run a Linux webserver than a Linux Oracle Financials server, for example. Especially when it comes to justifying it to management.
Linux really isn't at that stage yet - it's a fantastic *nix, but at that kind of level, where customers demand 99.99x% uptime, full, paid for and guaranteed support - whatever happens - from the guys who wrote the code, I'm not even sure that's Linux's niche.
However, I'd still argue that Windows NT is far behind Linux on all these issues - 64CPU WinNT? I think not.... I've not had experience of Win2K, but it seems to be a huge improvement in terms of stability and uptime - purely from what I've read.
I can see my karma flying out the window here, but let's just tell the truth...
Steve.
I suspect that the real thing to consider here, is the person who is buying the E10k.
I have installed a number of these for Sun customers, and yes, it is normally one person behind the project from the customer's end.
So what do you go through before you buy an E10k, and decide how to configure it?
Well, you're not working on a trivial project, so first you decide how to configure your machine, and THEN you decide on the platform which can provide to your needs.
So you would look at the application first, then the hardware.
You don't spend this kind of money for the sake of it; your project has to warrant it. So you decide what you need, how important it is, and then you can start talking megabucks if the service the machine will be providing is important enough (and your company has enough dough!)
Since it's established that the project is so important, it must be constantly available, fully supported, not go wrong in the first place, but be able to cope with everything from a disk failure to your power supplier's plant going tits-up without losing the service (remember, the data service here is critical, or you'd not be talking in this megabuck league in the first place).
If I'm going to buy an E10k, plus, let's say, an Oracle database, plus a Terabyte or two storage to go with it, plus the backup solution, plus the disaster-recovery solution, then the cost of support and software is getting trivial. Don't bother me with figures under $50,000. That's administrivia.
So, at this stage, of having decided on Oracle, Sun E10k, a few Terabytes of storage, L700 backups, off-site disaster recovery solution, and quite possibly getting two or more of these to cluster them, someone suggests I think hard about which OS to choose.
On the one hand, I've got my Sun support, with its 2hr callout for anything, 24/7, wherever I am (pretty much), damn' fine OS, and a Sun project manager looking after me who could quite possibly get the sack if things go badly wrong for me.
On the other hand, I've got Linux, which is another great OS, gives me load-sharing cluster, but not highly-available databases; and I can get a support contract from various companies, but none of whom have the power to give kernel updates in the case of a major failure, none of whom I could sue for the millions of $$$ I could lose by the project going bad before or even after signoff, but instead, I can trust loads of people who aren't bothered about my company, but are bothered about their OS looking good, to give me support. Oh, but none of these people helping me now with my OS (and therefore with my database SW too), can get their hands on an E10k, certainly not on one built just like mine, to test things out before giving them to me.
Remember, that I have already spent millions of $$$... not because I want the kit, but because MY job's on the line if the system doesn't deliver.
It just doesn't seem worth it for Linux to aim at this kind of market without all the infrastructure already in place.
Because you need access to huge hardware as test boxes, hordes of people with experience in building them, from a hardware and software point of view, and the proof that you've done it lots of times before, and can guarantee to take it all away at no extra cost if things don't work out,
even Microsoft can't get into the datacenter; what chance Linux?
Don't get me wrong; I *love* Linux for low-end machines (relative to E10k... laptop, webserver, etc, etc.) But the OS is a very small piece in the jigsaw when you are dealing with this kind of system. You take on entirely different values from "my fave [X] does function [Y] better than your fave [X]". Instead, the business who is buying the system looks at, "Will it work?", with a knife to your throat -and that knife will stay there until the system's obsolete. They like that knife; they *need* it. Without their system, they lose out to their competitors. It has to be there, and they have to know, before they buy any kit, that it will always be there. Until it can be proven that they will never have to use the knife, there is no place for small fry like Microsoft or even Linux at the big boy's data party, however appealing the concept may seem.
Steve.
One thing the E10k review gets right, is that a single domain can (largely) be treated as a single SPARC server. So much of the work that has been done on SPARC Linux would - I assume - still apply on an E10k domain.
Note that this is pure assumption, because I have never worked on SPARC Linux, let alone on an E10k! Stick to Solaris for that beastie... by the time the Linux team (much as I love Linux for smaller systems) get around to Dynamic Reconfig, Alternate Pathing, etc, etc, etc, then I'll reconsider...
Steve.
I've installed a few, working for Sun.
Sure they're complex; if you're buying one of these you don't want or expect an out-of-the-box install; you get project management, all sorts, configuring it to your exact requirements. Often people are buying their first E10k and don't really know what they're wanting to do with it (which is fun!), but they're damn' fine hardware, if you're serious enough to deal with them.
Personally, I love working on them just because it's so scary to think what people will do to you if you screwed it up! I *thrive* on challenge!
Steve.
A5x00 disk arrays ship with Veritas for free. These are often used with E10k's.
There's a difference.... You could hook up an Ultra 2 to an A5000 and get Veritas VM free (of charge).
That'd be VxFS. Journalling, logging file system. I install these suckers. You use a file system such as VxFS, always mirror the data two or three ways, use DRLs (Dirty Region Logs), which take note of what needs resynching in a mirror and what doesn't.
Don't get me wrong; I go for lunch when I reboot an E10k, but things could be worse with a few terabytes of storage!
BSc Degrees are pretty useless in the UK, as far as I can tell (I hold a 2(i) with Honours in Computer Science). It's done me little good, having had a few bosses younger than myself who've spent that time boosting their career within the company. However, I do find that some employers value it, but honestly can't see why, since I've used very little I learned there out in the real world.
So let's go through this "Score 3: Insightful" posting. Anything wrong with the moderation system on slashdot?
Copyrights ARE property. It IS there to help compensate people. If the whole world listens to a song at the same time, should the artist get only one payment?
Information CAN be stolen. Doesn't mean it should be. I am a Christian and don't recall Jesus telling anyone to share something which isn't theirs.
How can Copyright be a Monopoly?!!! C'mon! Intellectual Property is different (IANAL). Barcode scanners, video cards, etc, all rely on Intellectual Property but when done right, this can be maintained whilst still writing open source drivers for these devices. But I think you're going a bit off-track here. We're talking about Napster.
The Free Software community is based around the GPL, which is heavily dependant upon copyright in order to enforce its open-ness. Read the GPL! (get an adult to read it with you).
John Locke. His book is copyright, I suppose. Doesn't mean anything about power, just preserving his right to be known as the creator of a work. He has the right over who copies it and claims ownership.
When you grow up you will realise that there are a lot of laws, in most countries, which are unjust (some more than others) and people very much DO have to obey those laws. You have free will and are quite possibly CAPABLE of breaking those laws, but I'd like to see you tell that to the Judge!
78.32% of statistics are made up on the spot.
The people spoke, you, all of you, have to listen...... Big fan of democracy then, are you? Or should the whole world bow down to your views? Listen to them, ignore your antisocial theft and lawbreaking, and of course turn a blind eye to your naievete
Yeah; all this sounds like, is "if I request an object from the web, that request will be logged by the server I get it from".
That's the same whether it's an HTML, MSWord, RTF document, or an image, executable binary, whatever. Similarly, if I download something from an FTP server, that will be logged.
The only thing I can think that could be different is if I save the document locally, and it still contains an egg. So what? Surely the owner of the document is entitled to do that if they want?
Looks like it... I'd be kind of interested in this discussion, tho.
All I'd like (and I guess it'd be easy to write, but I'm not a C programmer), is a way to register with the RPM database that a certain package is installed, eg:
I install kernel-2.2.14.rpm
I install/usr/src/linux and compile 2.2.16.
I register with the RPM database that kernel-2.2.16.rpm is now installed
I can then install packages which depend on 2.2.16 without having to do the --nodeps option which would ignore other deps I'd not thought of
So, any offers to write that? Just add and remove the entry from the database...
I rememeber reading a survey on a webdesign site a while ago, asking which screen size people designed for - choices were 600x800, 1024x768, etc - there was no "All screen sizes" option.
Similarly, as you say, many sites stipulate a browser version/s - this is appalling, as the dejavu site demonstrates.... I've already updated one site I manage which had no <NOFRAMES> option.
So I guess I was asking more serious designers:-)
Didn't know you could stipulate install directories for IE, though - whenever I've upgraded it it's just gone off and done its own thing - ie, replaced the previous version - and it refuses to install an older version when a newer version is already installed....
Once the/. effect is over, I plan to use this for testing html...it's a pain to create pages and try to test them using as many browsers as poss....
I've never fathomed how professional website designers check out their work on, say, IE2, IE3, IE4, IE5 without using 4 different PCs
Just curious, anybody out there know how the pro's do it? Or how they run multiple browser versions?!
Okay, old story so nobody's bothered, but... I meant the TLD order particualry in this case because of the translation issue; okay, the German site could be www.bible.de.rel or www.bible.rel.de, but to me it seems intuitive that the www.bible.de.rel is in German Language, whereas the www.bible.rel.de is a German site.
Slashdot Mirror
#include <stddiscl.h>
#include <stddiscl.h>
Even if I don't like them, and voted against their party, then I cannot say that I do not know who is controlling it. See my rant about Speed Cameras.
BTW: As it happens, I just might have voted for this current UK gov't....
#include <stddiscl.h>
I can only count this as envy :-) You only invaded the Native Americans, and declare war just after each new President is elected ...
#include <stddiscl.h>
That surely is reason enough. This is not police/state vs. innocent public, but the monitoring of the police.
The cameras used in Police-Camera-Action!, and similar "look-you-can-be-caught-if-you're-bad" TV shows record everything that police car does... This is monitoring how they do their job, not just spying on citizens.
#include <stddiscl.h>
Speed cameras are what the public really hate. Road Rage is getting to be a serious problem over the past few years - no computer yet built can detect bad driving or discourtesy. What they can check is speed (there have been disputes over the system's accuracy to do this). Therefore, passing a 56mph lorry on a 60mph road can land you with a fine if you go over 60mph to overtake. Even if this is the safer option. Enough of these (4?) and you lose your license.
These pictures, unlike CCTV, are taken as proof. Also, there has been controversy over the method in which this evidence is applied.
You basically receive a letter stating that "your vehicle was doing XX mph in a YY mph area. If you were not the driver, you must identify the driver or be prosecuted for the offence yourself". (words to that effect). This removes the right to not incriminate oneself. You must either incriminate someone else, or admit to the offence. There is no option given to dispute the claim.
For any other crime/offence I would have the right to remain silent because my actions may incriminate me. In this one case, I have to either confess or name the person who was driving my car at that time.
Scottish law has seen this folly, and revised their law (they now have their own Parliament). For the UK, Wales and Ireland, however, this ridiculous system remains in place.
That's the real problem with cameras - when they are taken more seriously than genuine safety issues.
#include <stddiscl.h>
Particular forms of crime (pickpocketing, mugging, etc) has tended to have slowed due to the introduction of cameras in a given area.
However, after a while, the habitual petty criminals have realised that the results are low, mainly because the images are blurry and cannot normally, by themselves, stand up in court.
Catching and convicting is not the only aspect, of course. If two people can watch 20 cameras, and two are on the street, that's four staff with the effictiveness of twenty. That's a significant saving in public spending.
This applies mainly to day-time crimes (pickpocketing, etc), but at closing time this can aid police effectiveness massively. (Yes, we have draconian alcohol laws over here!)
Steve.
#include <stddiscl.h>
#include <stddiscl.h>
#include <stddiscl.h>
New Story: 1970s Newsflash
A radical new paper-industry company, known to insiders as "Xerox", are now in court against a coalition of publishers, including Mills&Boon, Future Publishing, Penguin, Black Swan.
It appears that the Xerox corporation are planning to introduce a radical new machine, which they claim will soon be commenplace in offices around the world. This new machine will be capable of making accurate paper copies of any book, magazine, or other publication ever made, without any payment being made to the original publisher or author.
It has been suggested that in thirty years' time, it would be possible for Xerox users to use the same technique to copy movies for their own private use.
Surely the whole world must be united in stopping the evil Xerox corporation.
The way forward is to show that it is incorrect to have the encryption, but that it is okay for the copyright owners to enforce their copyright, within reason. .txt or unenecrypted PDF available for $0.00...... ... they sell VCRs which are capable of breaking copyright law, but then make sure that the general public are so scared/incapable of programming them, that they do not achieve the desired results.
I can publish a book for $5.99, and get $5.99 a copy (less costs - let's say $1), or make a PDF (encrypted) available for $4.99 (a la Adobe's new idea), or make a
I'd go for the highest profit, not the best deal for the consumer, were I a publisher.
I do acknowledge the MPAA's goals here - they are entitled to cash for movies. The question is how they get it. Encryption shouldn't be an issue - I can photocopy a book, tape-to-tape a VHS tape, burn an audio CD onto a CDR; I expect the same ability with DVD. And this is, to the consumer, where it hangs. It may or may not ne legal, but I have always had the ability to make my own copies (for legal or illegal purposes), and now the MPAA are trying to remove this ability, regardless of my intent. Better encryption is not the issue at all - it's enforcement of copyright, which, when using technology to make the copies, is impossible without artifical intelligence.
My PC, or any other device, is not able to make an accurate legal judgement of whether or not I am allowed, under my local law, to make the copy I am requesting of it. Even if it could, it would still be trivial to circumvent. So technological protection is duff by defenition.
We should just make it tricky, like Sony et al already do
The public issuing of a Windows-only, poor-quality, DVD copying software, approved by the MPAA, would be their best solution here, as far as I can see. It would mean all that Napster and VHS really achieves - get a poor quality copy, or buy the real thing. Leave DeCSS users alone, so long as they don't make this kind of thing available to AOL users.
Linux really isn't at that stage yet - it's a fantastic *nix, but at that kind of level, where customers demand 99.99x% uptime, full, paid for and guaranteed support - whatever happens - from the guys who wrote the code, I'm not even sure that's Linux's niche.
However, I'd still argue that Windows NT is far behind Linux on all these issues - 64CPU WinNT? I think not.... I've not had experience of Win2K, but it seems to be a huge improvement in terms of stability and uptime - purely from what I've read. I can see my karma flying out the window here, but let's just tell the truth...
Steve.
I have installed a number of these for Sun customers, and yes, it is normally one person behind the project from the customer's end.
So what do you go through before you buy an E10k, and decide how to configure it?
Well, you're not working on a trivial project, so first you decide how to configure your machine, and THEN you decide on the platform which can provide to your needs.
So you would look at the application first, then the hardware.
You don't spend this kind of money for the sake of it; your project has to warrant it. So you decide what you need, how important it is, and then you can start talking megabucks if the service the machine will be providing is important enough (and your company has enough dough!)
Since it's established that the project is so important, it must be constantly available, fully supported, not go wrong in the first place, but be able to cope with everything from a disk failure to your power supplier's plant going tits-up without losing the service (remember, the data service here is critical, or you'd not be talking in this megabuck league in the first place).
If I'm going to buy an E10k, plus, let's say, an Oracle database, plus a Terabyte or two storage to go with it, plus the backup solution, plus the disaster-recovery solution, then the cost of support and software is getting trivial. Don't bother me with figures under $50,000. That's administrivia.
So, at this stage, of having decided on Oracle, Sun E10k, a few Terabytes of storage, L700 backups, off-site disaster recovery solution, and quite possibly getting two or more of these to cluster them, someone suggests I think hard about which OS to choose.
On the one hand, I've got my Sun support, with its 2hr callout for anything, 24/7, wherever I am (pretty much), damn' fine OS, and a Sun project manager looking after me who could quite possibly get the sack if things go badly wrong for me.
On the other hand, I've got Linux, which is another great OS, gives me load-sharing cluster, but not highly-available databases; and I can get a support contract from various companies, but none of whom have the power to give kernel updates in the case of a major failure, none of whom I could sue for the millions of $$$ I could lose by the project going bad before or even after signoff, but instead, I can trust loads of people who aren't bothered about my company, but are bothered about their OS looking good, to give me support.
Oh, but none of these people helping me now with my OS (and therefore with my database SW too), can get their hands on an E10k, certainly not on one built just like mine, to test things out before giving them to me.
Remember, that I have already spent millions of $$$
It just doesn't seem worth it for Linux to aim at this kind of market without all the infrastructure already in place.
Don't get me wrong; I *love* Linux for low-end machines (relative to E10kBecause you need access to huge hardware as test boxes, hordes of people with experience in building them, from a hardware and software point of view, and the proof that you've done it lots of times before, and can guarantee to take it all away at no extra cost if things don't work out, even Microsoft can't get into the datacenter; what chance Linux?
Steve.
That is, I've worked on E10k's with Solaris, but not SPARC Linux on anything ... Always preview before posting!!!
One thing the E10k review gets right, is that a single domain can (largely) be treated as a single SPARC server. So much of the work that has been done on SPARC Linux would - I assume - still apply on an E10k domain. Note that this is pure assumption, because I have never worked on SPARC Linux, let alone on an E10k! Stick to Solaris for that beastie... by the time the Linux team (much as I love Linux for smaller systems) get around to Dynamic Reconfig, Alternate Pathing, etc, etc, etc, then I'll reconsider ...
Steve.
I've installed a few, working for Sun. Sure they're complex; if you're buying one of these you don't want or expect an out-of-the-box install; you get project management, all sorts, configuring it to your exact requirements. Often people are buying their first E10k and don't really know what they're wanting to do with it (which is fun!), but they're damn' fine hardware, if you're serious enough to deal with them. Personally, I love working on them just because it's so scary to think what people will do to you if you screwed it up! I *thrive* on challenge! Steve.
A5x00 disk arrays ship with Veritas for free. These are often used with E10k's.
There's a difference.... You could hook up an Ultra 2 to an A5000 and get Veritas VM free (of charge).
Steve.
That'd be VxFS. Journalling, logging file system. I install these suckers. You use a file system such as VxFS, always mirror the data two or three ways, use DRLs (Dirty Region Logs), which take note of what needs resynching in a mirror and what doesn't.
Don't get me wrong; I go for lunch when I reboot an E10k, but things could be worse with a few terabytes of storage!
BSc Degrees are pretty useless in the UK, as far as I can tell (I hold a 2(i) with Honours in Computer Science). It's done me little good, having had a few bosses younger than myself who've spent that time boosting their career within the company. However, I do find that some employers value it, but honestly can't see why, since I've used very little I learned there out in the real world.
Steve
Copyrights ARE property. It IS there to help compensate people. If the whole world listens to a song at the same time, should the artist get only one payment?
The people spoke, you, all of you, have to listen...Information CAN be stolen. Doesn't mean it should be. I am a Christian and don't recall Jesus telling anyone to share something which isn't theirs.
How can Copyright be a Monopoly?!!! C'mon! Intellectual Property is different (IANAL). Barcode scanners, video cards, etc, all rely on Intellectual Property but when done right, this can be maintained whilst still writing open source drivers for these devices. But I think you're going a bit off-track here. We're talking about Napster.
The Free Software community is based around the GPL, which is heavily dependant upon copyright in order to enforce its open-ness. Read the GPL! (get an adult to read it with you).
John Locke. His book is copyright, I suppose. Doesn't mean anything about power, just preserving his right to be known as the creator of a work. He has the right over who copies it and claims ownership.
When you grow up you will realise that there are a lot of laws, in most countries, which are unjust (some more than others) and people very much DO have to obey those laws. You have free will and are quite possibly CAPABLE of breaking those laws, but I'd like to see you tell that to the Judge!
78.32% of statistics are made up on the spot.
That's the same whether it's an HTML, MSWord, RTF document, or an image, executable binary, whatever. Similarly, if I download something from an FTP server, that will be logged.
The only thing I can think that could be different is if I save the document locally, and it still contains an egg. So what? Surely the owner of the document is entitled to do that if they want?
All I'd like (and I guess it'd be easy to write, but I'm not a C programmer), is a way to register with the RPM database that a certain package is installed, eg: /usr/src/linux and compile 2.2.16.
I install kernel-2.2.14.rpm
I install
I register with the RPM database that kernel-2.2.16.rpm is now installed
I can then install packages which depend on 2.2.16 without having to do the --nodeps option which would ignore other deps I'd not thought of
So, any offers to write that? Just add and remove the entry from the database...
Similarly, as you say, many sites stipulate a browser version/s - this is appalling, as the dejavu site demonstrates.... I've already updated one site I manage which had no <NOFRAMES> option.
So I guess I was asking more serious designers :-)
Didn't know you could stipulate install directories for IE, though - whenever I've upgraded it it's just gone off and done its own thing - ie, replaced the previous version - and it refuses to install an older version when a newer version is already installed....
Once the /. effect is over, I plan to use this for testing html ...it's a pain to create pages and try to test them using as many browsers as poss....
I've never fathomed how professional website designers check out their work on, say, IE2, IE3, IE4, IE5 without using 4 different PCs
Just curious, anybody out there know how the pro's do it? Or how they run multiple browser versions?!
Okay, old story so nobody's bothered, but ...
I meant the TLD order particualry in this case because of the translation issue; okay, the German site could be www.bible.de.rel or www.bible.rel.de, but to me it seems intuitive that the www.bible.de.rel is in German Language, whereas the www.bible.rel.de is a German site.