How does this differ from the "Free" version they used to give away?
The "Free" version that they used to give away was for development use. You couldn't use that version on your production system. At least thats how I remember it. I was playing around with it and decided not to install it because of that limitation.
With this new version, it can be used on small production enviroments also. This makes it a lot appealing because of the starting costs of development and moving to production.
Yes, I explained that games.slashdot.org does not CONTAIN games in any form, but just news ABOUT games, but they haven't responded. They're a bunch of twits.
And what part of your work duties require you to follow news about games during work hours?
If none, you shouldn't be paid from the hours you spend reading slashdot during work hours. And best way for them not to pay, is disabling everything that you don't require for your work.
If it is your task to follow slashdot and similar forums, then there should be change on policies. Otherwise, it's their money they pay you do to your tasks required. And they make the calls what is accepted and what is not.
The stupid part of the story (as told by the poster) is that these IT "professionals" didn't seem to understand that Linux is incompatible with XP.
I've sometimes been answering to support calls and there are end users who say that they have linux just because corporate version of XP pro don't look like their home XP. And IT staff saw from their directory that he had a standard Windows that had on some point logged on to network. And it wasn't patched.
If you are not able to convince them that you know what you are doing and explain it instead of hunging up, stop complaining.
This sounds pretty much similiar to the JPEG patent thing, patent existed long begore it got industry standard. But because they didn't stop anybody before, they weren't allowed to charge anybody afterwards.
How is it now that MS is allowed to charge for something that has come a standard?
They should only be allowed to charge for FAT is they would have been doing it for the whole time FAT has existed.
And what if there are too many ships approaching to burn them all?
The trick is not to burn all attacking ships, but the fact that in ancient era ship bursting to fire without any clear reasons would have been tought as a gods doings.
Just spread around a story that our sun god would be very upset if somebody would attack. Boats catching fire after been hitted by sunbeams would scare the hell out of the crew.
When asked whether people should be allowed to express unpopular views, 97 percent of teachers and 99 percent of school principals said yes.
And yet, this is a country where one can get into trouble in school for advocating unpopular ideas - which suggests that the teachers and principals were not being entirely forthcoming in their own answers.
This is not very surprising, considering that teachers and principles don't consider students as people. They are just kids and the teachers have the rights to command them. On their view you need to be adult to be counted in people.
The UK Patent Office is aware that patents *may* be damaging to pure software, but believes that the "technical effect" rule will prevent this. Unfortunately they were utterly unconvincing when pressed for detail.
I'm against software patens in general, but the case with drivers or any internal chip-related software has its points.
Problem is, how to make real difference between firmware and software. Hacking some chip to do something else that it was originally designed for is something innovative and does not prevent somebody else to do similar tasks with diffrent chip.
What comes to patens and open source software, something done in OSS and being published shouldn't(can't) be patented by closed software companies. But does the patent office have resources and skills to find it out. And if copyrights of GPL'd software are violeted, who has the resources to correct situation.
Patents which are too ambiguous and too general, those having no real use to an overall industry or those too similar to existing patents or existing work, should not be condoned. Companies should not even bother---it makes them seem disrespectful to the industry.
In perfect world this wouldn't happen and therefore software patents should be possible. But in the real world, where companies try to patent anything that they can, patent offices are not able to investigate wich patents are too general to be allowed. This is why you get patens for one-click, double-click, scrollbar...
Other industries have existed long before patenting and on those industries most of the common tools and technigues have been availeble for everybody to innovate. When it has gotten more complex, then came the patents. But with more complex structures you need more R&D or something really innovative to prevent anybody else of doing something basic stuff.
software industry is just too young and evolving to be limited with patents.
Not being allowed to exactly duplicate someone else's work will encourage people to try alternate solutions, or experiment with variables.
Or just forget their ideas, because they have not enough resources to find out what parts of their innovation has been already been patented. Why risking everything, when you can join the big company and work there as they have allways done.
Newsflash: ALL patents are algorithms. Stop acting like this unique to computers. Chemical process patents, for example, are structurally and functionally indistinguishable and very obviously map into the same space as "software algorithms" and yet those are not considered controversial
Yes, but with software patens you see companies patenting things on chemical side like water, wild flowers, air and other kind of things that make no sence
patents create property. property is wealth. patents like all property create wealth. the more varieties of property in society the greater the wealth that can be created. the better off society as a whole becomes. you only need to look at the US versus poorer countries. it is the enforcement of property rights that has created wide spread wealth.
Weapons create property. property is wealth. Weapons like all property create wealth. the more varieties of weapons in society the greater the wealth that can be created. the better off society as a whole becomes. you only need to look at the US versus poorer countries. it is the enforcement of others property rights that has created wide spread wealth.
Or this could be very usefull. You walk with the phone on the street and the phone sees a hot chick. It could automaticly call to info to ask her number and autodial her for a date.
Seen in that light, the 500 (while doubtless still generous) are less than half of a single year's worth. Doesn't seem quite so impressive to me anymore...
500 patents IBM recently donated is impressive amount, no matter how many they were granted granted last year. Or how usefull and profitingg those patens are to IBM at the moment.
This is addition to time that IBM developers spend on open source projects to develope those benefitial to IBM at the moment. These developers still get paid by the IBM, so this adds their commitment to open source. And nothing at thome moment indicates that IBM wouldn't donate more patens that they don't need any more in future.
Only reason for IBM to drop their support and these ipmpressive gifts is the attitude of community. If we complain that we don't get enough, we won't be getting any in future.
500 out of 1300 this year is still a lot of possible income from those patents. How many of us can say that we spend third of our income on open-source, addition to time spend?
Many of the new member states are new to capitalism and have more extreme capitalist views than the old members.
Poland is one of the new memberstates and it is also new to capitalism. Still it has been one of the countries agaist(to my understanding) software patens.
New eastern memberstates don't have any signifiend software industry at the moment, so they would lose their change to enter the market if patents would be allowed at this moment. Their view might change after IT industry gets bigger in there.
Same problem with Photshop and pretty much every image manipulation software that I have used. UI sucks in all of them. Altough my graphics teacher blames more on the U-part than the software.
Try using/modifying these tools: # frequency analyzer [thepen.com] # caesar cipher cracker [sentex.net] # some other tools also available here [pintday.org]
Is it just me, or does anybody else think that it said that you should use semtex to crack a code. Not that it wouldn't work, but propably not with the intented solution.
Does it become a more inviting target for malicious coders?
Yes, it does.
Wether justified or not, I felt a little safer with this browser when less people were using it.
When more people are using Firefox and therefore more exploits are being designed malicious coders, it will be a lot easier for the Firefox coders to get these reports about the security holes and other problems that there might be.
So, there will be attacks agains Firefox, but this will only show the problems that there are, but have not been discovered yet.
My Firefox now informs me everytime I open my browser that there is new update available and gives me the reason to install that new release. New users that are not that technical are now able to see why thay should be doing something to keep them secure.
This is not anyway anything taken from the old time users who are aware of security issues and they can get more updates. Even if they have not seen any problems appearing with the earlier limited attemps to attack Firefox.
I prefer having all-in-1 devices build as cell phone. I carry that with me all the time, so it is a lot easier to have everything else with me.
I don't need to carry around a PDA, camera, CD-player, radio or any other stuff that I have build in to cell phone.
Of course PDA does many of the same things and most of them better than cell phone, but that is just extra things to carry. Same with camera and radio and mp3, I really don't need them, but if I'm stuck somewhere and need something to do for a while, like listening to music, I have it with me. Instead with seperate devices you need to plan what you take with you and where to pack them so that you can carry everything that you need.
Slashdot Mirror
I hate dubbed movies. Watching Schwarzynigger saying Hasta la vista, baby in portuguese?? no thanks!
Considering it's Schwarzenegger, anything else than his english is a lot better.
How does this differ from the "Free" version they used to give away?
The "Free" version that they used to give away was for development use. You couldn't use that version on your production system. At least thats how I remember it. I was playing around with it and decided not to install it because of that limitation.
With this new version, it can be used on small production enviroments also. This makes it a lot appealing because of the starting costs of development and moving to production.
Yes, I explained that games.slashdot.org does not CONTAIN games in any form, but just news ABOUT games, but they haven't responded. They're a bunch of twits.
And what part of your work duties require you to follow news about games during work hours?
If none, you shouldn't be paid from the hours you spend reading slashdot during work hours. And best way for them not to pay, is disabling everything that you don't require for your work.
If it is your task to follow slashdot and similar forums, then there should be change on policies. Otherwise, it's their money they pay you do to your tasks required. And they make the calls what is accepted and what is not.
The stupid part of the story (as told by the poster) is that these IT "professionals" didn't seem to understand that Linux is incompatible with XP.
I've sometimes been answering to support calls and there are end users who say that they have linux just because corporate version of XP pro don't look like their home XP. And IT staff saw from their directory that he had a standard Windows that had on some point logged on to network. And it wasn't patched.
If you are not able to convince them that you know what you are doing and explain it instead of hunging up, stop complaining.
This sounds pretty much similiar to the JPEG patent thing, patent existed long begore it got industry standard. But because they didn't stop anybody before, they weren't allowed to charge anybody afterwards.
How is it now that MS is allowed to charge for something that has come a standard?
They should only be allowed to charge for FAT is they would have been doing it for the whole time FAT has existed.
And what if there are too many ships approaching to burn them all?
The trick is not to burn all attacking ships, but the fact that in ancient era ship bursting to fire without any clear reasons would have been tought as a gods doings.
Just spread around a story that our sun god would be very upset if somebody would attack. Boats catching fire after been hitted by sunbeams would scare the hell out of the crew.
When asked whether people should be allowed to express unpopular views, 97 percent of teachers and 99 percent of school principals said yes.
And yet, this is a country where one can get into trouble in school for advocating unpopular ideas - which suggests that the teachers and principals were not being entirely forthcoming in their own answers.
This is not very surprising, considering that teachers and principles don't consider students as people. They are just kids and the teachers have the rights to command them. On their view you need to be adult to be counted in people.
The UK Patent Office is aware that patents *may* be damaging to pure software, but believes that the "technical effect" rule will prevent this. Unfortunately they were utterly unconvincing when pressed for detail.
I'm against software patens in general, but the case with drivers or any internal chip-related software has its points.
Problem is, how to make real difference between firmware and software. Hacking some chip to do something else that it was originally designed for is something innovative and does not prevent somebody else to do similar tasks with diffrent chip.
What comes to patens and open source software, something done in OSS and being published shouldn't(can't) be patented by closed software companies. But does the patent office have resources and skills to find it out. And if copyrights of GPL'd software are violeted, who has the resources to correct situation.
Patents which are too ambiguous and too general, those having no real use to an overall industry or those too similar to existing patents or existing work, should not be condoned. Companies should not even bother---it makes them seem disrespectful to the industry.
In perfect world this wouldn't happen and therefore software patents should be possible. But in the real world, where companies try to patent anything that they can, patent offices are not able to investigate wich patents are too general to be allowed. This is why you get patens for one-click, double-click, scrollbar...
Other industries have existed long before patenting and on those industries most of the common tools and technigues have been availeble for everybody to innovate. When it has gotten more complex, then came the patents. But with more complex structures you need more R&D or something really innovative to prevent anybody else of doing something basic stuff.
software industry is just too young and evolving to be limited with patents.
Not being allowed to exactly duplicate someone else's work will encourage people to try alternate solutions, or experiment with variables.
Or just forget their ideas, because they have not enough resources to find out what parts of their innovation has been already been patented. Why risking everything, when you can join the big company and work there as they have allways done.
Newsflash: ALL patents are algorithms. Stop acting like this unique to computers. Chemical process patents, for example, are structurally and functionally indistinguishable and very obviously map into the same space as "software algorithms" and yet those are not considered controversial
Yes, but with software patens you see companies patenting things on chemical side like water, wild flowers, air and other kind of things that make no sence
patents create property. property is wealth. patents like all property create wealth. the more varieties of property in society the greater the wealth that can be created. the better off society as a whole becomes. you only need to look at the US versus poorer countries. it is the enforcement of property rights that has created wide spread wealth.
Weapons create property. property is wealth. Weapons like all property create wealth. the more varieties of weapons in society the greater the wealth that can be created. the better off society as a whole becomes. you only need to look at the US versus poorer countries. it is the enforcement of others property rights that has created wide spread wealth.
someone better explain to them what IANAL
It is used on posts about legal stuff so that other people will get you seriously.
let alone when I'm walking along the road..
Or this could be very usefull. You walk with the phone on the street and the phone sees a hot chick. It could automaticly call to info to ask her number and autodial her for a date.
(i don't think Daredevil did well in Europe either, did it?)
Don't think that it did so well in Europe, it is not that here wouldn't be any fans, but who would like to see a crappy movie.
Seen in that light, the 500 (while doubtless still generous) are less than half of a single year's worth. Doesn't seem quite so impressive to me anymore...
500 patents IBM recently donated is impressive amount, no matter how many they were granted granted last year. Or how usefull and profitingg those patens are to IBM at the moment.
This is addition to time that IBM developers spend on open source projects to develope those benefitial to IBM at the moment. These developers still get paid by the IBM, so this adds their commitment to open source. And nothing at thome moment indicates that IBM wouldn't donate more patens that they don't need any more in future.
Only reason for IBM to drop their support and these ipmpressive gifts is the attitude of community. If we complain that we don't get enough, we won't be getting any in future.
500 out of 1300 this year is still a lot of possible income from those patents. How many of us can say that we spend third of our income on open-source, addition to time spend?
Many of the new member states are new to capitalism and have more extreme capitalist views than the old members.
Poland is one of the new memberstates and it is also new to capitalism. Still it has been one of the countries agaist(to my understanding) software patens.
New eastern memberstates don't have any signifiend software industry at the moment, so they would lose their change to enter the market if patents would be allowed at this moment. Their view might change after IT industry gets bigger in there.
It just makes ugly looking photos.
Same problem with Photshop and pretty much every image manipulation software that I have used. UI sucks in all of them. Altough my graphics teacher blames more on the U-part than the software.
Try using/modifying these tools:
# frequency analyzer [thepen.com]
# caesar cipher cracker [sentex.net]
# some other tools also available here [pintday.org]
Is it just me, or does anybody else think that it said that you should use semtex to crack a code. Not that it wouldn't work, but propably not with the intented solution.
I wouldn't have the slightest idea how to begin working on a problem like this. Anyone feel like offering an explanation of how to start ?
All you need to do is to hack into their system and look for the right answer. No need to break the code in contest.
It seem to me that people at MS were reading the ad about Firefox being a good alternative as a browser.
Why else would this happen just a day after the ad?
Now they can say that things are also going to be working(mayby 2k7, no need to install Firefox at this moment) with their products.
Does it become a more inviting target for malicious coders?
Yes, it does.
Wether justified or not, I felt a little safer with this browser when less people were using it.
When more people are using Firefox and therefore more exploits are being designed malicious coders, it will be a lot easier for the Firefox coders to get these reports about the security holes and other problems that there might be.
So, there will be attacks agains Firefox, but this will only show the problems that there are, but have not been discovered yet.
My Firefox now informs me everytime I open my browser that there is new update available and gives me the reason to install that new release. New users that are not that technical are now able to see why thay should be doing something to keep them secure.
This is not anyway anything taken from the old time users who are aware of security issues and they can get more updates. Even if they have not seen any problems appearing with the earlier limited attemps to attack Firefox.
People aren't *complete* idiots.
No, but users are.
Somehow the "166 2/3 club" lacks the pizzaz of the "300 Club"
not to mention mile-high club.
I prefer having all-in-1 devices build as cell phone. I carry that with me all the time, so it is a lot easier to have everything else with me.
I don't need to carry around a PDA, camera, CD-player, radio or any other stuff that I have build in to cell phone.
Of course PDA does many of the same things and most of them better than cell phone, but that is just extra things to carry. Same with camera and radio and mp3, I really don't need them, but if I'm stuck somewhere and need something to do for a while, like listening to music, I have it with me. Instead with seperate devices you need to plan what you take with you and where to pack them so that you can carry everything that you need.
I KNOW this will be implemented in the near future!
It is on the testing phace, all that the engineers are lacking at the moment is a testing engineer with a (ex-)girlfriend.