Safari is uber paranoid about other filetypes now-- if you download a tar or a dmg it says "warning, this file may contain an application, are you sure you want to uncompress this?" It didn't do this before Tiger.
The unzip/install widgets thing wasn't a conscious decision. This is clearly a bug.
They go directly from Smalltalk/PARC to Apple/LISA as if nothing happened in between. There actually were a decent number of GUI/windowing systems in the late 70s / early 80s, and a number of pre-X attempts at making a UNIX GUI, that time has totally forgotten. PERQ is the only one I can seem to find evidence of the existence of on Google offhand. If you can somehow find a copy of the book containing this history of GUIs written in 1986, it's rather fascinating...
We were starting to get to a point where using social security numbers as identification was actually prohibited, and this prohibition was actually being enforced. For example, note how many colleges had previously used soc#s as student IDs but who have been phasing that out in the last five years.
The passme sticks out of the case in a really ugly way, necessarily requires the use of both slots, and requires you to buy a gba flashcard. I think I'll just wait for the DS flashcarts. I want something I can take to Panera Bread.
Do you actually think SCO will have any money left by the time this case is over? I bet this case only ends when SCO go bankrupt.
No, not really, I'm expecting SCO to spend all their money on the court case and then go bankrupt to brush away the countersuits, fraud allegations, shareholders and debtors that come after that. But, in a best case scenario maybe the corporate veil can be pierced or whatever the hell you call it and the board members and the Canopy Group that owns SCO can be held accountable for the debts and actions of SCO. There is good reason to believe the Canopy Group purposefully directed SCO to act as it did knowing exactly how valid the claims were, and both the Canopy Group and the board members have profited generously from the stock manipulations of SCOX.
I'm pretty sure the corporation system is not designed to let you create or purchase a shell corporation, commit illegal acts and rack up debts, and then just toss the shell corporation into bankruptcy and say "whoops all forgiven". But this looks to me exactly like what Canopy's trying to do. Is there not anything in the legal system to prevent this?
Even if not though and the people who orchestrated all this get away scot free, though, it just makes things look that much better for Linux in the press afterward if the amount of money SCO goes out of business not having paid is that much higher...
If once the discovery's done IBM is able to prove that SCO's case is frivolous or some such, or countersues, or something, can IBM get SCO to pay them back for the cost of collecting this evidence?
How difficult would it be for IBM to qualify for this and what would they have to do?
The PSP uses those small little minicds, which you still can't burn to.
Yeah, but it also has those memory sticks, which you can write to. And now that they've figured out how to get the games *off* the UMDs, they can put them on the memory sticks. Now it's just a matter of figuring out how (modchip?) to boot games off the memory stick.
Of course the memory sticks are way more expensive than the games and Sony probably makes more money off of them than the games, but that's neither here nor there.
It won't do any good at all. It will be like esperanto; what's the point of creating an open document format if you won't be able to communicate with anyone with it? Because unfortunately, if you can't communicate with the stock install of Microsoft Word, you basically can't communicate with anyone.
Okay, yeah, I'm sure there's probably some tiny niche somewhere this fills. But the rest of us are going to have to ignore this new thingy and just continue shipping around.docs for the same reason we use.doc to transfer files now: For the benefit of people too lazy or dumb to open files in anything but Microsoft Word.
There was a period some years ago, when I first started looking for work, that I didn't have a copy of Microsoft Word, so I would send out my resume as an HTML file, or a PDF, or if it seemed appropriate both. Over this period, most of the time when I sent my resume out, the response-- even when the sent file was just an HTML file, that you double click and it opens in MSIE-- was "I can't figure out how to open your resume, do you have a.doc?" And these were mostly tech jobs I was applying for. It was kind of scary. Now I have a copy of Microsoft Word which I own seemingly solely so that I can create my resume in it, and my resume is sent out as.doc, always.
You're forgetting opportunity cost -- it needs to not just make a profit, but make more profit than (whatever other movie the people involved could be working on instead).
That kinda sorta cuts both ways though. It might not have made more profit than some other things they could have been making instead, but it likely made more profit than a lot of other things they could have been making instead, like, I dunno, "Alone in the Dark". Do movie studios really talk about opportunity costs, seriously? The movie industry is basically a large and very formal form of gambling. Do people in Las Vegas walk away from the roulette wheel talking about opportunity cost??
They left the earth intact at the end of the movie. This, to mean, implies that they've given themselves a perfect opportunity to take after the original radio show and destroy the earth in every single installation of the movie trilogy, in a different way. I hope they take it:D
But there is no such thing as pure objective journalism, except perhaps the weather
But there really is such a thing as a journalist, and we honestly can make classifications between different categories of journalists (protestations from the fox news "all reporting is equally subjective" crowd aside). For example, if John Kerry wrote an article for a newspaper, we would not refer to him as a journalist, we would refer to him as a politician-- because that is the more accurate label.
Likewise, perhaps we should not allow anti-GPL activists such as Ms. O'Gara to represent themselves in the press by the label "analysts". The press does not refer to PETA spokespersons or NRA spokespersons or other activists as "analysts"; why Ms. O'Gara? It is not the more accurate label.
Juries will do what they think is justice based upon what they think they understand.
If I'm not terribly mistaken juries are not permitted to rule on issues of law, only those of fact. This particular suit appears to be demanding nearly purely a ruling of law.
The slashdot blurb here says that David Wallace and Maureen O'Gara filed this lawsuit. The Groklaw link however seems to be saying that David Wallace filed the suit and Maureen O'Gara was merely acting as volunteer PR shill for it. My OP post above took the slashdot blurb by its letter.
What exactly is the relationship of Ms. O'Gara to this lawsuit?
I wonder if after this point Maureen O'Gara will continue to present herself as an "analyst", since her hired-hand work at this work is now well outside of PR-- and arguably taking even more active participation in the war against open source than many of the corporations involved directly have at this point.
How can one simultaneously report on news and create news?
For fuck's sake. It's pretty much just agreed the world over that science will be constantly used to create new and horrible weapons that could kill increasingly large numbers of people in increasingly horrible ways, but that strangely enough it's expected will never be used. You tell someone about Russia restarting its nuclear weapons research program and people just shrug and go, meh, they do that.
But if it turns out science might be at some point to do something that, rather than being horrific and violent, is merely strange, people freak the fuck out. A bomb that can kill billions in a single moment is shrugged off as normal. But tell someone that someone might be growing sheep with human livers, and what's the response? Oh no! What a horrible perversion of nature! Why do we continue to let such horrible things happen! Never mind that this, you know, has the capacity to save lives or create useful technology on a huge scale. It's "unnatural!" Of course, so is fire and clothing and the internet. But for some reason those are okay and genetic engineering is not.
Mankind has the capacity to do strange and wonderful things, and instead of trying to find exactly where our capacities lie we're holding back everywhere just based on pure grossout factor.
If the reason we're holding back scientific progress is actually "ethics"-- people complaining about genetics and such keep using that word, I am not sure they know what it means-- I want to know why they're worrying so much about sheep in laboratory conditions with some slightly strange DNA in their brains and totally ignoring the relatively horrible conditions that totally normal sheep, chickens, etc are being bred and harvested in on a worldwide scale. The worldwide march of technology and progress has brought a lot of horrible things, but we shrug, decide we don't care, and eat our chicken mcnuggets anyway. So why freak out so much over these sheep? If the rediculously unlikely situation we turn out to have created sheep with thinking, feeling human brains, okay, give them legal rights and a social security card and move on with your lives. I assure you, this isn't worse than what happened to the contents of those chicken mcnuggets, just a little bit wierder.
I'm very curious about this. But I can't look at PDFs where I am now.
Is this language compatible with Java? Can it / is it designed to live on a Java virtual machine, or interact with Java?
What with Sun's general unhelpfulness with getting languages alternate to Java running in/on the Java runtime, I find it potentially very interesting to see them at least in some small way admitting you might need more than one programming language, especially if they eventually wind up admitting java programmers might need to occationally use other languages.
Unfortunately the scientists in this case were all reading Asimov and Heinlein, and so believed that all they had to do was be very smart and discover things and much younger beautiful women would unexpectedly materialize and fall in love with them for no apparent reason.
This rather dampened the stories' also-present warnings in their mind.
*shakes fist* ASIMOV, YOUR INABILITY TO WRITE BELIEVABLE THREE-DIMENSIONAL FEMALE CHARACTERS HAS DAMNED THE VERY EXISTENCE OF HUMANITY!
Once we've reached this point, seriously, how close to nanotechnology are we? What are the limits of this technology? It seems to me like bacteria are basically rather sophisticated nanomachines. If this article isn't hyperbole and we can basically program bacteria... well, at first glance it seems like we could just skip the entire hard part of nanomachinery construction and use the nanomachines nature's built for us.
Failing that, I like the idea of a computer-slaved zombified bacteria invasion.
<Steve McQueen> THE ZOMBIES! THEY ARE COMING! THERE ARE MILLIONS OF THEM! THEY'RE RIGHT BEHIND ME! <Bystander> Um, I don't see anything. <Steve McQueen> Well they're really small.
At the time Windows was registered windowing operating systems certainly existed, but no one marketed/sold them as that until Microsoft did.
Where'd you get that impression? I've read accounts of industry conferences of graphical and windowing systems from about the time Microsoft Windows was released and they certainly seemed to be under the impression that they were selling windowing operating environments. The thing I'm mostly thinking of here is a talk I read a transcript of called "ten years of windowing systems" given slightly after MS-Windows was first released and seemingly largely unaware of the idea Microsoft had done anything important at all in the area.
Anyway rather than try to hunt through Google-- which does an occasionally poor job of finding documents which predate the world wide web-- for examples of windowing systems sold as such, I will simply refer you to Sun Microsystems' Network Extensible Window System, a contemporary of early Microsoft Windows which was, in fact, sold under that name.
This may be good news for Linux because Microsoft cannot be trusted with protecting your information.
I don't think I'd even be quite as worried about. I'd be worried about whether Microsoft are the ones getting that data in the first place. This seems really susceptible to a man-in-the-middle attack. Please tell me these crash reports are at least SSLed?
How Microsoft is the one who gets all this information. On other operating systems, it wouldn't be assumed that the operating system vendor for some reason needed bug and crash reports for every single application running on the system (Including. Y'know. The crash reports for software by competing companies.).
But then, I guess, now that I think about it, on Windows these days, every single application either is written by Microsoft or mere support or widgets for Microsoft applications. I seem to remember a time when there was more than one windows word processor, but those days are long gone.
As EU citizen I am far, far more concerned about the Brussels bohemeth then whether Bush and Cheney make more money on the Iraq war than the UN did on the food-for-oil scandal.
As an EU citizen, you aren't going to have to clean up Bush/Cheney's mess.
Slashdot Mirror
Safari is uber paranoid about other filetypes now-- if you download a tar or a dmg it says "warning, this file may contain an application, are you sure you want to uncompress this?" It didn't do this before Tiger.
The unzip/install widgets thing wasn't a conscious decision. This is clearly a bug.
They go directly from Smalltalk/PARC to Apple/LISA as if nothing happened in between. There actually were a decent number of GUI/windowing systems in the late 70s / early 80s, and a number of pre-X attempts at making a UNIX GUI, that time has totally forgotten. PERQ is the only one I can seem to find evidence of the existence of on Google offhand. If you can somehow find a copy of the book containing this history of GUIs written in 1986, it's rather fascinating...
We were starting to get to a point where using social security numbers as identification was actually prohibited, and this prohibition was actually being enforced. For example, note how many colleges had previously used soc#s as student IDs but who have been phasing that out in the last five years.
Well, so much for that.
The passme sticks out of the case in a really ugly way, necessarily requires the use of both slots, and requires you to buy a gba flashcard. I think I'll just wait for the DS flashcarts. I want something I can take to Panera Bread.
A device with
- A touchscreen
- An auxiliary screen
- 802.11
- For $150
Find a way to boot off of a flashcart DS cart, and fuck, this sounds like a really good deal to me.Do you actually think SCO will have any money left by the time this case is over? I bet this case only ends when SCO go bankrupt.
No, not really, I'm expecting SCO to spend all their money on the court case and then go bankrupt to brush away the countersuits, fraud allegations, shareholders and debtors that come after that. But, in a best case scenario maybe the corporate veil can be pierced or whatever the hell you call it and the board members and the Canopy Group that owns SCO can be held accountable for the debts and actions of SCO. There is good reason to believe the Canopy Group purposefully directed SCO to act as it did knowing exactly how valid the claims were, and both the Canopy Group and the board members have profited generously from the stock manipulations of SCOX.
I'm pretty sure the corporation system is not designed to let you create or purchase a shell corporation, commit illegal acts and rack up debts, and then just toss the shell corporation into bankruptcy and say "whoops all forgiven". But this looks to me exactly like what Canopy's trying to do. Is there not anything in the legal system to prevent this?
Even if not though and the people who orchestrated all this get away scot free, though, it just makes things look that much better for Linux in the press afterward if the amount of money SCO goes out of business not having paid is that much higher...
The PSP uses those small little minicds, which you still can't burn to.
Yeah, but it also has those memory sticks, which you can write to. And now that they've figured out how to get the games *off* the UMDs, they can put them on the memory sticks. Now it's just a matter of figuring out how (modchip?) to boot games off the memory stick.
Of course the memory sticks are way more expensive than the games and Sony probably makes more money off of them than the games, but that's neither here nor there.
It won't do any good at all. It will be like esperanto; what's the point of creating an open document format if you won't be able to communicate with anyone with it? Because unfortunately, if you can't communicate with the stock install of Microsoft Word, you basically can't communicate with anyone.
.docs for the same reason we use .doc to transfer files now: For the benefit of people too lazy or dumb to open files in anything but Microsoft Word.
.doc?" And these were mostly tech jobs I was applying for. It was kind of scary. Now I have a copy of Microsoft Word which I own seemingly solely so that I can create my resume in it, and my resume is sent out as .doc, always.
Okay, yeah, I'm sure there's probably some tiny niche somewhere this fills. But the rest of us are going to have to ignore this new thingy and just continue shipping around
There was a period some years ago, when I first started looking for work, that I didn't have a copy of Microsoft Word, so I would send out my resume as an HTML file, or a PDF, or if it seemed appropriate both. Over this period, most of the time when I sent my resume out, the response-- even when the sent file was just an HTML file, that you double click and it opens in MSIE-- was "I can't figure out how to open your resume, do you have a
There is PR, and then there is totally awesome PR.
This is definitely the second.
You're forgetting opportunity cost -- it needs to not just make a profit, but make more profit than (whatever other movie the people involved could be working on instead).
That kinda sorta cuts both ways though. It might not have made more profit than some other things they could have been making instead, but it likely made more profit than a lot of other things they could have been making instead, like, I dunno, "Alone in the Dark". Do movie studios really talk about opportunity costs, seriously? The movie industry is basically a large and very formal form of gambling. Do people in Las Vegas walk away from the roulette wheel talking about opportunity cost??
*********SPOILERS***************
:D
_
_
They left the earth intact at the end of the movie. This, to mean, implies that they've given themselves a perfect opportunity to take after the original radio show and destroy the earth in every single installation of the movie trilogy, in a different way. I hope they take it
But there is no such thing as pure objective journalism, except perhaps the weather
But there really is such a thing as a journalist, and we honestly can make classifications between different categories of journalists (protestations from the fox news "all reporting is equally subjective" crowd aside). For example, if John Kerry wrote an article for a newspaper, we would not refer to him as a journalist, we would refer to him as a politician-- because that is the more accurate label.
Likewise, perhaps we should not allow anti-GPL activists such as Ms. O'Gara to represent themselves in the press by the label "analysts". The press does not refer to PETA spokespersons or NRA spokespersons or other activists as "analysts"; why Ms. O'Gara? It is not the more accurate label.
Juries will do what they think is justice based upon what they think they understand.
If I'm not terribly mistaken juries are not permitted to rule on issues of law, only those of fact. This particular suit appears to be demanding nearly purely a ruling of law.
The slashdot blurb here says that David Wallace and Maureen O'Gara filed this lawsuit. The Groklaw link however seems to be saying that David Wallace filed the suit and Maureen O'Gara was merely acting as volunteer PR shill for it. My OP post above took the slashdot blurb by its letter.
What exactly is the relationship of Ms. O'Gara to this lawsuit?
I wonder if after this point Maureen O'Gara will continue to present herself as an "analyst", since her hired-hand work at this work is now well outside of PR-- and arguably taking even more active participation in the war against open source than many of the corporations involved directly have at this point.
How can one simultaneously report on news and create news?
For fuck's sake. It's pretty much just agreed the world over that science will be constantly used to create new and horrible weapons that could kill increasingly large numbers of people in increasingly horrible ways, but that strangely enough it's expected will never be used. You tell someone about Russia restarting its nuclear weapons research program and people just shrug and go, meh, they do that.
But if it turns out science might be at some point to do something that, rather than being horrific and violent, is merely strange, people freak the fuck out. A bomb that can kill billions in a single moment is shrugged off as normal. But tell someone that someone might be growing sheep with human livers, and what's the response? Oh no! What a horrible perversion of nature! Why do we continue to let such horrible things happen! Never mind that this, you know, has the capacity to save lives or create useful technology on a huge scale. It's "unnatural!" Of course, so is fire and clothing and the internet. But for some reason those are okay and genetic engineering is not.
Mankind has the capacity to do strange and wonderful things, and instead of trying to find exactly where our capacities lie we're holding back everywhere just based on pure grossout factor.
If the reason we're holding back scientific progress is actually "ethics"-- people complaining about genetics and such keep using that word, I am not sure they know what it means-- I want to know why they're worrying so much about sheep in laboratory conditions with some slightly strange DNA in their brains and totally ignoring the relatively horrible conditions that totally normal sheep, chickens, etc are being bred and harvested in on a worldwide scale. The worldwide march of technology and progress has brought a lot of horrible things, but we shrug, decide we don't care, and eat our chicken mcnuggets anyway. So why freak out so much over these sheep? If the rediculously unlikely situation we turn out to have created sheep with thinking, feeling human brains, okay, give them legal rights and a social security card and move on with your lives. I assure you, this isn't worse than what happened to the contents of those chicken mcnuggets, just a little bit wierder.
C++ has gained alot of ground ... through the use of templates and template metaprogramming
The phrase "phyrrhic victory" comes to mind.
I'm very curious about this. But I can't look at PDFs where I am now.
Is this language compatible with Java? Can it / is it designed to live on a Java virtual machine, or interact with Java?
What with Sun's general unhelpfulness with getting languages alternate to Java running in/on the Java runtime, I find it potentially very interesting to see them at least in some small way admitting you might need more than one programming language, especially if they eventually wind up admitting java programmers might need to occationally use other languages.
Unfortunately the scientists in this case were all reading Asimov and Heinlein, and so believed that all they had to do was be very smart and discover things and much younger beautiful women would unexpectedly materialize and fall in love with them for no apparent reason.
This rather dampened the stories' also-present warnings in their mind.
*shakes fist* ASIMOV, YOUR INABILITY TO WRITE BELIEVABLE THREE-DIMENSIONAL FEMALE CHARACTERS HAS DAMNED THE VERY EXISTENCE OF HUMANITY!
Once we've reached this point, seriously, how close to nanotechnology are we? What are the limits of this technology? It seems to me like bacteria are basically rather sophisticated nanomachines. If this article isn't hyperbole and we can basically program bacteria... well, at first glance it seems like we could just skip the entire hard part of nanomachinery construction and use the nanomachines nature's built for us.
Failing that, I like the idea of a computer-slaved zombified bacteria invasion.
<Steve McQueen> THE ZOMBIES! THEY ARE COMING! THERE ARE MILLIONS OF THEM! THEY'RE RIGHT BEHIND ME!
<Bystander> Um, I don't see anything.
<Steve McQueen> Well they're really small.
At the time Windows was registered windowing operating systems certainly existed, but no one marketed/sold them as that until Microsoft did.
Where'd you get that impression? I've read accounts of industry conferences of graphical and windowing systems from about the time Microsoft Windows was released and they certainly seemed to be under the impression that they were selling windowing operating environments. The thing I'm mostly thinking of here is a talk I read a transcript of called "ten years of windowing systems" given slightly after MS-Windows was first released and seemingly largely unaware of the idea Microsoft had done anything important at all in the area.
Anyway rather than try to hunt through Google-- which does an occasionally poor job of finding documents which predate the world wide web-- for examples of windowing systems sold as such, I will simply refer you to Sun Microsystems' Network Extensible Window System, a contemporary of early Microsoft Windows which was, in fact, sold under that name.
This may be good news for Linux because Microsoft cannot be trusted with protecting your information.
I don't think I'd even be quite as worried about. I'd be worried about whether Microsoft are the ones getting that data in the first place. This seems really susceptible to a man-in-the-middle attack. Please tell me these crash reports are at least SSLed?
How Microsoft is the one who gets all this information. On other operating systems, it wouldn't be assumed that the operating system vendor for some reason needed bug and crash reports for every single application running on the system (Including. Y'know. The crash reports for software by competing companies.).
But then, I guess, now that I think about it, on Windows these days, every single application either is written by Microsoft or mere support or widgets for Microsoft applications. I seem to remember a time when there was more than one windows word processor, but those days are long gone.
As EU citizen I am far, far more concerned about the Brussels bohemeth then whether Bush and Cheney make more money on the Iraq war than the UN did on the food-for-oil scandal.
As an EU citizen, you aren't going to have to clean up Bush/Cheney's mess.