That is what I like about this new law. It doesn't force anyone to do anything. It does allow movie theaters to implement something, and the public will decide if they prefer going to a theater that allow cells or not.
Didn't you notice that this ruling effectively makes cell phone blocking impossible? It's sort of like suing your city for the right to put a sign up on your easement, and them saying "Sure, so long as it offers no obstruction of the vision of the sidewalk".
By definition, the theatre could *never* satisfy the conditions under which their permission has been granted...
How in the world would a theatre block all calls except "emergency" calls?
You need merely to supply me with my answer the perennial question of copyright: What's in it for me?
1) Well-though books at your local bookstore. (Perhaps you should buy a few on copyright to understand the concepts?)
2) Music on the radio? Or, on a CD that sound better than the garage band next door?
3) Software that works? (Even GNU is a license based on copyright law that enforces contribution in exchange for rights to use!)
Don't forget that "the deal" behind copyrights is to allow a monopoly for a limited time to the author/creator of intellectual works (books, etc) to encourage authors to produce quality works.
In exchange, that copyright is void after (originally) some 20 years, and the works are released into the public domain.
It's really a shame that you'd comment so vigorously on a subject about which you apparently know so little.
Many ask "What's in it for me?" because this other end of the deal, the cancellation of said rights in a reasonable period of time has been cancelled on you.
You might recall me mentioning this at the beginning....
It's probably worth pointing out here that you can't get a copyright on a database as a database in the US.
Wow! You're wrong on the very first line! Of course, you generally can't claim copyright on the CONTENTS of the database, but the structure or "compilation" of the database is perfectly copyrightable....
copyrights are not about removing rights of consumers
Despite doing precisely that.
Sort of like land ownership rights removing your right to walk on it?
To this, I must ask, why the fuck should I tolerate this? Should I let you come over to my house and eat my food just because you're an artist? You're already deciding for me what I can and cannot say or write.
1) Using profanity is a common tactic to strengthen one's words. In a debate, profanity seldom has an effect other than to make the user look foolish and stupid. Best to refrain from using them!
2) As an artist (note that I never claimed to be one) how has copyright allowed me to forcibly eat dinner at your house? If you listen to MY music, or use MY software, or wish to benefit from MY database, I have a right to demand MY dinner, or don't use my stuff. Simple, no? This way, we let the laws of economics determine the viability of my products, as with any other business or industry. It's amazingly fair and has withstood the test of hundreds of years of time...
3) How would such an artist decide what you can/cannot say or write? What, you can't COPY what I said or wrote? (Oh, but wait, that's not YOU saying it, that's you quoting ME.... a VERY different matter.) Note that the IDEA is not copyrighted, just my specific representation of it! If I wrote a book on, say, biodiesel, and you liked it, you could write your own book, and include the exact same facts and ideas as in my book. You can even cite and quote references from my work!
In all, I have to say, yours is a very poorly thought out argument. Come back when you've thought this through...
In other words, the "loss" comes from the copyright system; it is not an inherent part of copying. Copying in itself hurts no one.
... and you'll argue this "no loss" defense until you have some significant work of your own, of intellectual nature - a book, music, software, database, etc...
Really, copyrights are not about removing rights of consumers, it's about offering producers choice about their works. They can give it away, license it, or keep it carefully to themselves.
With the exception of the rediculous term (~ 100 YEARS!) copyright is one form of intellectual property that our government got RIGHT. Either I have a right to dictate how my works are used, or I have no defense against larger companies who wish to steal my works for profit.
Copyright levels the playing field so that "little guys" can eke out a business without having to suck up to the big guys. Again, the only weakness is the term of copyright.
What makes this issue particularly relevant is that P2P is the fundamental structure of the Internet itself. Any IP address can "publish" materials online via HTTP, anon-FTP, BitTorrent, NNTP, and too many other protocols to name.
If all forms of P2P are illegal, then the Internet is, also.
Write a letter to your senator/representative today!
It's not a morally tenable position to lower ourselves to the level of brutes just so we can vindicate some idea of retribution.
And this, perhaps, is the primal argument of pragmatism against idealism when it comes to criminal "rehabilitation". Retribution has some preventative effect on the commision of crime.
Some people get very idealistic about this, but the point of the system is to stop crimes from happening so that the majority of people can live comfortable, relatively safe lives. As to whether punitive actions or educational/rehabilitative actions prove better is a question that's never seen the light of proper scrutiny.
Until there's a proper, evaluative, scientific analysis of various methods of discipline as a response to the commitment of a crime, we'll have stupidity such as the three strikes law. This is law based on a baseball term! Talk about stupidity ruling the unwashed masses!
Morality would be fine, except that it cannot be properly defined. It's moral for some to chop a finger for theft. It's moral for others release drug dealers because it's a "non violent" crime with "no victim". It's not right or wrong, it's finding the balance of strictness and laxness that results in
A) Fewer crimes commited, and
B) Potentially innocent defendants not being treated in an unnecessarily bad fashion.
We should use the yardstick of reason - what actually works, and what do the majority of the people find acceptable?
The digital version prepared...17 years ago, on 12" video disk is, at least for all practical purposes, unreadable.
Don't confuse the issue of replication of vital information with the methods by which this replication is done. The Internet has created a giant, cross-platform information replication device, making the issues of portability and transmission all but disappear, so, on the immediate, it's not the issue that it used to be.
If you RTFA, Britain developed custom 12" video disks for this application. Developing custom, high-tech solutions for long term archiving is a dubious idea, at best.
From the article:
'That means we have to find a way to emulate this data, in other words to turn into a form that can be used no matter what is the computer format of the future. That is the real goal of this project.'
Somebody's thinking about using a standardized document format...
A few years ago, I had decided to ditch Windows. I was getting through the inevitable Linux learning curve, and having somewhat of a time with it.
I saw a Mac Cube at the local Circuit city - and I just drooled. They had a guy with a mop as I left. It was drop-dead sexy. It was not windows. It was Unix. It was what I looked for in a workstation, only better.
I didn't buy it - I didn't have the $1,900 it cost at the time. And I am so, so glad I didn't.
Had I bought that cube, I'd be floating in an island of incompatability. The cube is no longer sold. If anything went wrong, I'd have to buy parts from Apple at a premium. I have numerous systems, often cheap, low-ball systems (think AMD K6) for dedicated/embedded systems and micro-servers. They use the same software my nice, fancy Dell laptop uses. I can test on the laptop, then deploy on cheap hardware with confidence.
For me, buying that Mac would have locked me out of my marketplace, and left me forever chasing the compatability train.
If you are going to "do" Linux, then do it. Dogfood. Put it on your workstation/laptop/home computter, then make it your primary operating environment.
I'm writing this on a Linux box that hasn't been rebooted since March.
Which sounds nice and all, and if you were talking about server uptime, I'd agree.
But, if you're typing this on said "Linux box", it's very unlikely to be a server. Which means, it's your workstation. Probably some AMD Athlon. Running 99.95% of the time with a load average between 0.01 and 0.00, while you sleep, party, work, or doze in class.
Think of the electricity you're wasting, both in the computer itself, and the A/C to cool your room down after your volunteer space heater warmed it up.
Let's run some numbers. In the US, (I don't know where you are) Electricity costs about $0.08 per KWH. It's been on since March, and let's say you actually use the computer oh, 6 hours per day? (Typical, unless you're a coder)
That leaves 18 hours per day since March - let's say March 15th. A quick check shows this to be about 208 days. (Thank you date() and mktime()!) An Athlon computer probably burns, on average, between 150 and 250 watts total, with graphics card, CPU, HDD, etc. Let's call it at 200 watts.
18*205*175=738,000 watt hours. You pay $0.08 per KWH, so the mere fact of leaving your computer (un-necessarily) has cost you $59.04, which assumes that you don't use air conditioning.
Other than stroking your ego, what purpose does leaving your computer on 24/7 really serve you?
One of the greatest catastrophes in human history was the burning of the great library at Alexandria, Egypt.
See, the ancient world had many items of great wisdom, and many of the only copies of these works were contained there. The burning of the great library was the end for countless such works.
Today, however, our knowledge is much more widely spread. We all owe a tremendous debt to Gutenburg, for his printing press (removable type press, 1436) for making this possible.
It's quite arguable that the dawn of the renaissance stemmed not from Galileo, or Kepler, but from the widespread nature of books in general after the removable type printing press made this possible.
How many of these works are unique or very rare? I'd consider that a large percentage of these works fall into this category - in which, it would be a wonderful thing to build in some redundancy into the preservation of not only these works, but the wisdom, insight, and humor contained therein!
But would you trust it? Would you REALLY want to use a hack on top of something that somebody else provided for free for your mission-critical data?
Neither did I. What I don't get is the advantage. I mean, using no-ip.com and your average DSL account, you can turn your home computer into an "online storage" at a cost of around around $0.50 per gigabyte.
Wow. Those google guys are sure being nice! I mean, you gotta love these people, right?
For a community that seems to love google, this sure seems like a stupid, wasteful, and mean thing to do.
... and it keeps asking me if I a bride from Soviet Russia.
(Burns a little karma)
A few years ago, I got the "soviet bride" spam. I decided to have a bit of fun with it. I went to the web page that they offered, and posted the most incredibly "oh my god I am such a loser" post on their web thingy, complete with a picture of a 400 lb lard ass in the nude in front of a computer.
For months afterward, I kept ketting offers from them picturing these young, beautiful babes "from Russia" who had seen my ad and were just dying to be my wife, and I could purchase their contact information for just $9.95....
My real (flesh/blood/damn sexy) wife and I had many good laughs from that one.
If (and it is a big "if") IBM will back FireFox in the same way that IBM has backed Linux, then FireFox could easily grab 60% of the browser market.
And, assuming that IBM decided that Mozilla was the path to eternal enlightenment, exactly how would this cause 60% of the world's users to switch to Moz?
You carry your licence so that people know who you are, and this would just provide a better way to verify that information.
Heh? I seldom carry a license at all. I memorized the number years ago, and in fact, I've never HAD the license when being pulled over by police. (four times in the last 14 years) I've never been given guff because I know my numbers, and when the police call in my ID, everything checks out.
I've never even been verbally told that I am supposed to carry it! (This is in Northern California)
I buy most things with cash, sometimes I use an ATM or, more rarely, check. You'd be amazed the places that will take what you say at face value if you rattle off your ID numbers verbally, with confidence, with a slightly annoyed tone to your voice.
Yes, I have a current license, but it spends most of its existence in the cabinet above my closet. Most times/places, if I decided I didn't want to tell somebody who I was, even a full body search still wouldn't reveal that information.
Now, REALLY, why did you carry your license again?
Why would it be "slow as crap"? Any more than javascript? We're talking about validating a small cert (what, 2k? 4k?) downloading code to the browser, (maybe, 20-30k?) then rendering. (a la Glade/GTK) There'd be some interpretive code (being a PHP nut I know my language of choice, but think javascript, only not brain dead)
What bloody difference would a firewall make? We're talking about running an app over http/https - which even in a poorly implemented firewall would be obvious where the problem would be, since NO web-pages would display!
they offered IE for free in the hope that they could "embrace and extend" the internet - stopping all other browsers, and thereby stopping all other platforms - but it didn't work. so why should they bother any more?
Imagine what they COULD have done by leveraging IE into developing weblications!
The biggest problem with web-based anything is the lack of control you have over the browser. Not coincidentally, this is why development time for web-based applications is quick - the application output is very simple.
For example, I've written a medium-sized application (~40,000 lines) in PHP-GTK and love the control I get over the client experience in the application. User chooses X, I pop up a dropdown list to get more information, pop up an editor that captures their input in real time, etc....
It's hard to impossible to do all this with javascript, but it's sort of what I'm talking about.
Take javascript, make it 10x more powerful, and provide some security measures.
For example, a certificate that would have to be installed in the browser first before scripts from NNN site would operate. Control the distribution of the certificates, and you control access to the application! You could use a bi-directional certificate so that both sides authenticate each other!
Run this over HTTPS and you'd have a damn secure application framework that would allow for:
1) Rapid application development times - On the server it'd be a set of ASP/PHP style scripts.
2) Rich client-ish interfaces that make XUL look tame.
3) Secure by design. Your scripts would only be accessable to somebody with a valid certificate.
4) If sufficiently developed, the javascript replacement could operate offline merely by saving the script to disk. (stretching things a bit, here)
In short, all the advantages of web-based design with all the advantages of client-side design. What's not to like?
They botched it with ActiveX, but it was an attempt at what I'm talking about. Can you imagine trying to fight that?
Java comes close to the above - but it lacks the security features I'm mentioning, and it's operational characteristics are "heavy" - the JVM is large and slow, particularly in low-memory situations.
to work on games that promote "emergent" gameplay--open-ended exploration that offers many choices and combinations of options to players
What I find endlessly interesting is the amount of effort and money being spent to make video games that mirror real life - as though there isn't this real life out there waiting for you!
I think it's a side effect of standardized education. We're all taught from early ages to respect the institution beyond our own personal judgements. Creativity is supressed in favor of complacency and "sit down, shut up". Psychological shackles are placed and maintained so consistently through our childhood, that we aren't even aware that we wear them. We succumb to the inevitable - prepare for and go to college, get a job, 401k, etc.....
But then, this new environment shows up, free of these shackles, and the first thing we want to do is to make it as much like our life as possible - only without these shackles.
"Free to do whatever you like". No shackles. Yet, the shackles aren't really there in the first place!
You don't need a job - you need money. You don't need a schedule. You don't need a boss. You don't need to sacrifice your day-to-day life in order to pay for that 7,000 environment killer to impress your neighbors. These things are all just stress. They are all just shackles!
The shackles are in your mind. How freeing it is to be rid of them! How pointless video games suddenly seem! The real world is so much richer, so much fuller, so much more inviting!
Finding your passion (such as, for me, engineering) is so incredibly rewarding! Knowing that on the morrow, when I awake, I will create peace for hundreds of people, some I've met, and many more I'll never know.
My works will ease the burden for these fine, good people. Their day will be a little brighter, their song will be a little lighter. And, these good people, will then be a little more free to spend their energies helping those they help.
I know this because they tell me so. I know this because I see the results. I've seen the kids, happy, hopeful, and bright.
What a joy it is to find one's true passion in life! Face your fears, clear away your shackles, and discover your true passion in life! Strength, joy, and peace of mind can be yours.
Now that I think about it, I wonder if "hydrogen" is an attempt to provide an exotic-sounding, sexy alternative energy system that's inherently unworkable in order to distract us from technology that really could work? (biodiesel)/TIN FOIL HAT
Hydrogen is hard to keep, not very energy dense, easily explosive, etc.
We'd do much better exploring biodiesel than trying to pursue solar/hydrogen as a fuel system.
From the article:
There are many problems with using hydrogen as a fuel. The first, and most obvious, is that hydrogen gas is extremely explosive. To store hydrogen at high pressures for as a transportation fuel, it is essential to have tanks that are constructed of rust-proof materials, so that as they age they won't rust and spring leaks. Hydrogen has to be stored at very high pressures to try to make up for its low energy density. Diesel fuel has an energy density of 1,058 kBtu/cu.ft. Biodiesel has an energy density of 950 kBtu/cu.ft, and hydrogen stored at 3,626 psi (250 times atmospheric pressure) only has an energy density of 68 kBtu/cu.ft.4 So, highly pressurized to 250 atmospheres, hydrogen's volumetric energy density is only 7.2% of that of biodiesel.
And that's not including the subject of efficiency. Solar/hydrogen is extremely inefficient.
A common dream from the environmentalist community is having a solar panel on the roof of a home to electrolyze water, producing hydrogen for a fuel cell vehicle. It's a nice dream, but not particularly realistic. As a real world example, consider Honda's facility in California that requires an 8 kW solar array to produce enough hydrogen to drive one small hydrogen vehicle roughly 7,500 miles per year. Such an array could power several homes in California, but is only enough for powering one small car half the normal driving range in the US. For an average family with two vehicles that drive an average distance of 15,000 miles per year, an array of 32 kW would be needed - considerably more with larger vehicles. A 32 kW array would cost on the order of $160,000, and could not be installed just on the rooftop of a single home - it would likely require the south-facing rooftops of at least 4-8 houses to power the vehicles from one home (and that's if you live in sunny California...
It's a neat project - I'll grant that easily. However, the end result is that at this time, it's just not feasible.
However, biodiesel is competetive (or close to competetive) with diesel at today's prices. It requires NO modification to your car (assuming your car runs diesel, of course) and can be mixed freely with diesel.
So, there's no penalty for using biodiesel. That's where the money should be put!
Ok which courts? US? ones, how about if N. Kora spy agency got court orders to investigate some one in the US (ya right really like this will happen but just for the sake of the question please give me this one) will that be allowed?
This is a pretty simple legal issue - one that deserves much less delineation than you apparently imagine.
In this case, a "court order" would be an order by a court having jurisdiction over the area in question. In other words, you aren't going to be held accountable in California for a Mexican court - they have no jurisdiction over you. Similarly, you won't have to worry about federal court, either, unless you operate in one of a few select areas that fall under federal jurisdiction (EG: Bank robbery, interstate fraud, etc)
There's no need to specify which court, because a court order cannot by definition apply in an area outside its jurisdiction.
Slashdot Mirror
That is what I like about this new law. It doesn't force anyone to do anything. It does allow movie theaters to implement something, and the public will decide if they prefer going to a theater that allow cells or not.
Didn't you notice that this ruling effectively makes cell phone blocking impossible? It's sort of like suing your city for the right to put a sign up on your easement, and them saying "Sure, so long as it offers no obstruction of the vision of the sidewalk".
By definition, the theatre could *never* satisfy the conditions under which their permission has been granted...
How in the world would a theatre block all calls except "emergency" calls?
RTFA next time, eh?
It's not a bank, people!
Others have said similar, I merely divert your attention to http://www.paypalsucks.com/....
apparently the worm tries to download stuff from www.78p.com
Slashdotted already. (sigh)
You need merely to supply me with my answer the perennial question of copyright: What's in it for me?
1) Well-though books at your local bookstore. (Perhaps you should buy a few on copyright to understand the concepts?)
2) Music on the radio? Or, on a CD that sound better than the garage band next door?
3) Software that works? (Even GNU is a license based on copyright law that enforces contribution in exchange for rights to use!)
Don't forget that "the deal" behind copyrights is to allow a monopoly for a limited time to the author/creator of intellectual works (books, etc) to encourage authors to produce quality works.
In exchange, that copyright is void after (originally) some 20 years, and the works are released into the public domain.
It's really a shame that you'd comment so vigorously on a subject about which you apparently know so little.
Many ask "What's in it for me?" because this other end of the deal, the cancellation of said rights in a reasonable period of time has been cancelled on you.
You might recall me mentioning this at the beginning....
Wow! You're wrong on the very first line! Of course, you generally can't claim copyright on the CONTENTS of the database, but the structure or "compilation" of the database is perfectly copyrightable....
copyrights are not about removing rights of consumers
Despite doing precisely that.
Sort of like land ownership rights removing your right to walk on it?
To this, I must ask, why the fuck should I tolerate this? Should I let you come over to my house and eat my food just because you're an artist? You're already deciding for me what I can and cannot say or write.
1) Using profanity is a common tactic to strengthen one's words. In a debate, profanity seldom has an effect other than to make the user look foolish and stupid. Best to refrain from using them!
2) As an artist (note that I never claimed to be one) how has copyright allowed me to forcibly eat dinner at your house? If you listen to MY music, or use MY software, or wish to benefit from MY database, I have a right to demand MY dinner, or don't use my stuff. Simple, no? This way, we let the laws of economics determine the viability of my products, as with any other business or industry. It's amazingly fair and has withstood the test of hundreds of years of time...
3) How would such an artist decide what you can/cannot say or write? What, you can't COPY what I said or wrote? (Oh, but wait, that's not YOU saying it, that's you quoting ME.... a VERY different matter.) Note that the IDEA is not copyrighted, just my specific representation of it! If I wrote a book on, say, biodiesel, and you liked it, you could write your own book, and include the exact same facts and ideas as in my book. You can even cite and quote references from my work!
In all, I have to say, yours is a very poorly thought out argument. Come back when you've thought this through...
Really, copyrights are not about removing rights of consumers, it's about offering producers choice about their works. They can give it away, license it, or keep it carefully to themselves.
With the exception of the rediculous term (~ 100 YEARS!) copyright is one form of intellectual property that our government got RIGHT. Either I have a right to dictate how my works are used, or I have no defense against larger companies who wish to steal my works for profit.
Copyright levels the playing field so that "little guys" can eke out a business without having to suck up to the big guys. Again, the only weakness is the term of copyright.
What makes this issue particularly relevant is that P2P is the fundamental structure of the Internet itself. Any IP address can "publish" materials online via HTTP, anon-FTP, BitTorrent, NNTP, and too many other protocols to name.
If all forms of P2P are illegal, then the Internet is, also.
Write a letter to your senator/representative today!
It's not a morally tenable position to lower ourselves to the level of brutes just so we can vindicate some idea of retribution.
And this, perhaps, is the primal argument of pragmatism against idealism when it comes to criminal "rehabilitation". Retribution has some preventative effect on the commision of crime.
Some people get very idealistic about this, but the point of the system is to stop crimes from happening so that the majority of people can live comfortable, relatively safe lives. As to whether punitive actions or educational/rehabilitative actions prove better is a question that's never seen the light of proper scrutiny.
Until there's a proper, evaluative, scientific analysis of various methods of discipline as a response to the commitment of a crime, we'll have stupidity such as the three strikes law. This is law based on a baseball term! Talk about stupidity ruling the unwashed masses!
Morality would be fine, except that it cannot be properly defined. It's moral for some to chop a finger for theft. It's moral for others release drug dealers because it's a "non violent" crime with "no victim". It's not right or wrong, it's finding the balance of strictness and laxness that results in
A) Fewer crimes commited, and
B) Potentially innocent defendants not being treated in an unnecessarily bad fashion.
We should use the yardstick of reason - what actually works, and what do the majority of the people find acceptable?
Don't confuse the issue of replication of vital information with the methods by which this replication is done. The Internet has created a giant, cross-platform information replication device, making the issues of portability and transmission all but disappear, so, on the immediate, it's not the issue that it used to be.
If you RTFA, Britain developed custom 12" video disks for this application. Developing custom, high-tech solutions for long term archiving is a dubious idea, at best.
From the article:Somebody's thinking about using a standardized document format...
NO.
A few years ago, I had decided to ditch Windows. I was getting through the inevitable Linux learning curve, and having somewhat of a time with it.
I saw a Mac Cube at the local Circuit city - and I just drooled. They had a guy with a mop as I left. It was drop-dead sexy. It was not windows. It was Unix. It was what I looked for in a workstation, only better.
I didn't buy it - I didn't have the $1,900 it cost at the time. And I am so, so glad I didn't.
Had I bought that cube, I'd be floating in an island of incompatability. The cube is no longer sold. If anything went wrong, I'd have to buy parts from Apple at a premium. I have numerous systems, often cheap, low-ball systems (think AMD K6) for dedicated/embedded systems and micro-servers. They use the same software my nice, fancy Dell laptop uses. I can test on the laptop, then deploy on cheap hardware with confidence.
For me, buying that Mac would have locked me out of my marketplace, and left me forever chasing the compatability train.
If you are going to "do" Linux, then do it. Dogfood. Put it on your workstation/laptop/home computter, then make it your primary operating environment.
Otherwise, go home and shuddup.
I'm writing this on a Linux box that hasn't been rebooted since March.
Which sounds nice and all, and if you were talking about server uptime, I'd agree.
But, if you're typing this on said "Linux box", it's very unlikely to be a server. Which means, it's your workstation. Probably some AMD Athlon. Running 99.95% of the time with a load average between 0.01 and 0.00, while you sleep, party, work, or doze in class.
Think of the electricity you're wasting, both in the computer itself, and the A/C to cool your room down after your volunteer space heater warmed it up.
Let's run some numbers. In the US, (I don't know where you are) Electricity costs about $0.08 per KWH. It's been on since March, and let's say you actually use the computer oh, 6 hours per day? (Typical, unless you're a coder)
That leaves 18 hours per day since March - let's say March 15th. A quick check shows this to be about 208 days. (Thank you date() and mktime()!) An Athlon computer probably burns, on average, between 150 and 250 watts total, with graphics card, CPU, HDD, etc. Let's call it at 200 watts.
18*205*175=738,000 watt hours. You pay $0.08 per KWH, so the mere fact of leaving your computer (un-necessarily) has cost you $59.04, which assumes that you don't use air conditioning.
Other than stroking your ego, what purpose does leaving your computer on 24/7 really serve you?
Really?
One of the greatest catastrophes in human history was the burning of the great library at Alexandria, Egypt.
See, the ancient world had many items of great wisdom, and many of the only copies of these works were contained there. The burning of the great library was the end for countless such works.
Today, however, our knowledge is much more widely spread. We all owe a tremendous debt to Gutenburg, for his printing press (removable type press, 1436) for making this possible.
It's quite arguable that the dawn of the renaissance stemmed not from Galileo, or Kepler, but from the widespread nature of books in general after the removable type printing press made this possible.
How many of these works are unique or very rare? I'd consider that a large percentage of these works fall into this category - in which, it would be a wonderful thing to build in some redundancy into the preservation of not only these works, but the wisdom, insight, and humor contained therein!
Warm up the scanner, says I!
But would you trust it? Would you REALLY want to use a hack on top of something that somebody else provided for free for your mission-critical data?
Neither did I. What I don't get is the advantage. I mean, using no-ip.com and your average DSL account, you can turn your home computer into an "online storage" at a cost of around around $0.50 per gigabyte.
Wow. Those google guys are sure being nice! I mean, you gotta love these people, right?
For a community that seems to love google, this sure seems like a stupid, wasteful, and mean thing to do.
... and it keeps asking me if I a bride from Soviet Russia.
(Burns a little karma)
A few years ago, I got the "soviet bride" spam. I decided to have a bit of fun with it. I went to the web page that they offered, and posted the most incredibly "oh my god I am such a loser" post on their web thingy, complete with a picture of a 400 lb lard ass in the nude in front of a computer.
For months afterward, I kept ketting offers from them picturing these young, beautiful babes "from Russia" who had seen my ad and were just dying to be my wife, and I could purchase their contact information for just $9.95....
My real (flesh/blood/damn sexy) wife and I had many good laughs from that one.
If (and it is a big "if") IBM will back FireFox in the same way that IBM has backed Linux, then FireFox could easily grab 60% of the browser market.
And, assuming that IBM decided that Mozilla was the path to eternal enlightenment, exactly how would this cause 60% of the world's users to switch to Moz?
<YODA>
From your arse do you speak I say.
</YODA>
why spend money developing your own browser when you can use someone elses for free and just put a little front end on it?
Which sounds fine... until you realize that they DID spend the money!
The Mozilla browser in which I type this was largely funded by.... AOL!
I honestly don't understand this. There must be some "quiet" deal we don't know about...
You carry your licence so that people know who you are, and this would just provide a better way to verify that information.
Heh? I seldom carry a license at all. I memorized the number years ago, and in fact, I've never HAD the license when being pulled over by police. (four times in the last 14 years) I've never been given guff because I know my numbers, and when the police call in my ID, everything checks out.
I've never even been verbally told that I am supposed to carry it! (This is in Northern California)
I buy most things with cash, sometimes I use an ATM or, more rarely, check. You'd be amazed the places that will take what you say at face value if you rattle off your ID numbers verbally, with confidence, with a slightly annoyed tone to your voice.
Yes, I have a current license, but it spends most of its existence in the cabinet above my closet. Most times/places, if I decided I didn't want to tell somebody who I was, even a full body search still wouldn't reveal that information.
Now, REALLY, why did you carry your license again?
Why would it be "slow as crap"? Any more than javascript? We're talking about validating a small cert (what, 2k? 4k?) downloading code to the browser, (maybe, 20-30k?) then rendering. (a la Glade/GTK) There'd be some interpretive code (being a PHP nut I know my language of choice, but think javascript, only not brain dead)
What bloody difference would a firewall make? We're talking about running an app over http/https - which even in a poorly implemented firewall would be obvious where the problem would be, since NO web-pages would display!
they offered IE for free in the hope that they could "embrace and extend" the internet - stopping all other browsers, and thereby stopping all other platforms - but it didn't work. so why should they bother any more?
Imagine what they COULD have done by leveraging IE into developing weblications!
The biggest problem with web-based anything is the lack of control you have over the browser. Not coincidentally, this is why development time for web-based applications is quick - the application output is very simple.
For example, I've written a medium-sized application (~40,000 lines) in PHP-GTK and love the control I get over the client experience in the application. User chooses X, I pop up a dropdown list to get more information, pop up an editor that captures their input in real time, etc....
It's hard to impossible to do all this with javascript, but it's sort of what I'm talking about.
Take javascript, make it 10x more powerful, and provide some security measures.
For example, a certificate that would have to be installed in the browser first before scripts from NNN site would operate. Control the distribution of the certificates, and you control access to the application! You could use a bi-directional certificate so that both sides authenticate each other!
Run this over HTTPS and you'd have a damn secure application framework that would allow for:
1) Rapid application development times - On the server it'd be a set of ASP/PHP style scripts.
2) Rich client-ish interfaces that make XUL look tame.
3) Secure by design. Your scripts would only be accessable to somebody with a valid certificate.
4) If sufficiently developed, the javascript replacement could operate offline merely by saving the script to disk. (stretching things a bit, here)
In short, all the advantages of web-based design with all the advantages of client-side design. What's not to like?
They botched it with ActiveX, but it was an attempt at what I'm talking about. Can you imagine trying to fight that?
Java comes close to the above - but it lacks the security features I'm mentioning, and it's operational characteristics are "heavy" - the JVM is large and slow, particularly in low-memory situations.
What I find endlessly interesting is the amount of effort and money being spent to make video games that mirror real life - as though there isn't this real life out there waiting for you!
I think it's a side effect of standardized education. We're all taught from early ages to respect the institution beyond our own personal judgements. Creativity is supressed in favor of complacency and "sit down, shut up". Psychological shackles are placed and maintained so consistently through our childhood, that we aren't even aware that we wear them. We succumb to the inevitable - prepare for and go to college, get a job, 401k, etc.....
But then, this new environment shows up, free of these shackles, and the first thing we want to do is to make it as much like our life as possible - only without these shackles.
"Free to do whatever you like". No shackles. Yet, the shackles aren't really there in the first place!
You don't need a job - you need money. You don't need a schedule. You don't need a boss. You don't need to sacrifice your day-to-day life in order to pay for that 7,000 environment killer to impress your neighbors. These things are all just stress. They are all just shackles!
The shackles are in your mind. How freeing it is to be rid of them! How pointless video games suddenly seem! The real world is so much richer, so much fuller, so much more inviting!
Finding your passion (such as, for me, engineering) is so incredibly rewarding! Knowing that on the morrow, when I awake, I will create peace for hundreds of people, some I've met, and many more I'll never know.
My works will ease the burden for these fine, good people. Their day will be a little brighter, their song will be a little lighter. And, these good people, will then be a little more free to spend their energies helping those they help.
I know this because they tell me so. I know this because I see the results. I've seen the kids, happy, hopeful, and bright.
What a joy it is to find one's true passion in life! Face your fears, clear away your shackles, and discover your true passion in life! Strength, joy, and peace of mind can be yours.
Verizon Wireless
Woah. I'll be using this one...
-Ben
Now that I think about it, I wonder if "hydrogen" is an attempt to provide an exotic-sounding, sexy alternative energy system that's inherently unworkable in order to distract us from technology that really could work? (biodiesel) /TIN FOIL HAT
We'd do much better exploring biodiesel than trying to pursue solar/hydrogen as a fuel system.
From the article:And that's not including the subject of efficiency. Solar/hydrogen is extremely inefficient.It's a neat project - I'll grant that easily. However, the end result is that at this time, it's just not feasible.
However, biodiesel is competetive (or close to competetive) with diesel at today's prices. It requires NO modification to your car (assuming your car runs diesel, of course) and can be mixed freely with diesel.
So, there's no penalty for using biodiesel. That's where the money should be put!
a consultant is someone who borrows your watch, tells you what time it is, keeps your watch, and bills you for it.
I object!
Not all consultants are created equal! I'm at least nice enough to let you use your watch anytime you like afterwards!
Ok which courts? US? ones, how about if N. Kora spy agency got court orders to investigate some one in the US (ya right really like this will happen but just for the sake of the question please give me this one) will that be allowed?
This is a pretty simple legal issue - one that deserves much less delineation than you apparently imagine.
In this case, a "court order" would be an order by a court having jurisdiction over the area in question. In other words, you aren't going to be held accountable in California for a Mexican court - they have no jurisdiction over you. Similarly, you won't have to worry about federal court, either, unless you operate in one of a few select areas that fall under federal jurisdiction (EG: Bank robbery, interstate fraud, etc)
There's no need to specify which court, because a court order cannot by definition apply in an area outside its jurisdiction.