Absolutely, build a consensus for what you believe in.
Consensus making is a lose-lose.
Ok, now I'm confused. In the last sentence you were touting the importance of convincing people that you are right, and now you are saying building a consensus for what you believe in is bad? I give up.
The recipient would be better off getting nothing, instead building self-sufficiency with free software technologies.
Your analogy with drug prohibition seems apt, as you are using the same kind of paternalistic bullshit reasoning as the drug warriors. Why don't you let the recipient decide if they would rather have nothing? If they want to use free software, no one is stopping them from doing so. If they perfer to accept the donations instead, that's their business, not yours.
The Cable Guy wsa the beginning of his decline because it was his first big failure commercially. This is because dark comedies are hard to sell to a mainstream audience, and those who do like them don't coincide much with Carrey's fan base. It is not because he did a poor job acting in the movie.
Not to be picky (ok, I am being picky), but their Castlevania listing is hardly complete.
Now that you mention it looks like a few of their other listing aren't complete either. For example, I believe that there were more than 16 games in the category of "8-bet / 16 bit platform game". And wasn't there a grand theft auto game before III? Or a mega man game between 4 and 8 other than "X".
Oh wait, maybe they're not trying to list every game ever made. I think a more reasonable criticism is how many games they aren't listing
HR has to keep all resumes on file for $FOO years (I forget the number)
Does anyone know what the point of this rule is? I can understand that they would want to keep the best resumes (out of the people they didn't hire) for the next opening(s), but why be required to keep all resumes on file?
Obviously, it'd take more than a script kiddie to pull it off, especially since the technique is patent-pending
Because a script kiddie would certainly respect and obey patent laws. And would abide by copyright law by not using a pirated version of the obfuscation program.
If God didn't want us to eat animals why did he make them out of meat?
Huh? The fact that something is made of something unhealthy that becomes downright carcinogenic when cooked and is full of diseases when not means that we are meant to eat it? This seems similar to asking "if god didn't want us to smoke cigarettes, why did he make them out of tobacco?".
If you're a cola drinker but not a Pepsi drinker, buying a Coke is really costing you $1.20 + 99 (99 for lost opportunity cost).
This should be "if you're a cola drinker, but not a Pepsie driner, and you're an iTMS user". Otherwise, you might be a coke user whose valuation of the free song he could get is less than 99 cents.
Re:Best learner's C++?
on
Practical C++
·
· Score: 1
I haven't read thinking in c++, so I can't comment on that. But I disagree with your assessment of thinking in java. There were some parts that taught basics as you mention (not just of programming, but also at length the basics of object-oriented design). However, once the basics were out of the way, the later sections explained features of the language extremely well. I definitely think the book is worth buying for these chapters. Rather than simply explaining what the language allows you to do, he explains why and how best to use it. This is not meant as a reference book on minutae of the language, it's meant to provide thorough discussions of the language's features that need to be read carefully. I am thinking in particular of the section on inner classes, which really enlightened me as to what inner classes are and how to use them.
I think it'll be some 13yo kid somewhere in the US; someone who definitely won't have the resources or sense of outrage to take on SCO legally, but who will generate public sympathy to the point where his "SCO tax" will be paid by someone else.
If they tried to do this, IBM or some other large company with interests in Linux would pay his legal fees. I guess this might be what you meant by someone else paying, but I think that a company (e.g., IBM or Redhat) would step in right away, and it woudn't be a question of how much public sympathy there would be.
I also think that SCO understands this and will avoid this path accordingly.
I did not state that "wmp uses special api's" but rather that WMP has access to them.
I apologize if you feel I misquoted you. I was trying to use "uses" as a synonym for "accesses," not "provides". I was using it in the same sense that you do above when you say you can't "prove that WMP uses undocumented APIs". In other words , I simply used the word "special" to mean secret and undocumented, whereas you directly used "undocumented". That doesn't seem like a gross misquoting, but if you feel it was, I apologize. This is why I usually quote directly using blockquotes, but I got lazy. I understood exactly what you meant, even if I paraphrased it poorly.
I can't prove that WMP uses undocumented APIs without the full source code any more than you can disprove it
I wasn't trying to disprove anything. I never claimed that wmp doesn't use undocmented apis. I have no idea how wmp works internally. I simply asked you where you were getting your information from, since you stated wmp's access to non-public api's as fact. But you don't have any information on this and were just speculating based on similar incidents (I'm familiar with the antitrust trial) and stating that speculation as fact. Fine. Everything is clear now.
Microsoft is not publishing the API for the HTML DLL, and that's just crap
I'm not sure what you mean by this. The existing documentation on mshtml.dll seems pretty decent to me. If you haven't used it, here's documentation on one function chosen pretty much at random. I haven't had to use it that much, so I'm not that familiar with the limitations of the documentation. How is it crap?
nd if they were documented such that I could reference them, then I wouldn't be here complaining
I didn't mean provide full documentation of the API itself, I meant provide a news story, etc., saying that wmp uses "special api's".
Let's try this again. You say: "wmp uses special api's". I say "Really, I didn't know that. Please point me to more info on this, or at least tell me how you know this is true". And you say... what? I didn't really get an answer just that this is "well known". Well then there should be some info on it somewhere, right? Or, again, were you just making things up?
Even then it still can't compete because WMP has access to a better API.
Care to provide a reference to which "better" API you are talking about? Or are you just making things up and assuming that since it sounds anti-msft, people will assume it's true? Because I can play that game too: linux can't compete with windows on the desktop, because windows has access to super-secret extra registers on intel chips that are hidden from linux. Wow, that was easy.
bundling Netscape/Real/etc with Microsoft's Operating Systems makes no logical sense.
I agree. What happens if I go home tonight and create my own crappy media program that no one uses. Will they have to bundle that too? No? The EU seems to think it makes sense to give preference to a few products that they deem worthy. This doesn't seem like a good way for business to operate at all.
Not everyone that looks at this code is going to be nice enough to tell the "good guys" about the exploits.
Instead, they will write and release exploits...
True. But the same is also true of linux, etc.
Re:Looks like he "proved" what he wanted to.
on
WineConf 2004 Wrapup
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
Since he ended at -1, I don't think that proved it. His post is modded up, which causes people to react by pointing out what's wrong with it, and it immediately dives to -1. So the system works okay in my opinion, provided that the post doesn't spend too long at 5 before getting struck down to -1. I think that he did show that some poeple react to the tone of authority (by the fact that anyone modded him up at all), but not that the moderation system is broken. More of a statement on human nature than on slashdot.
Yeah, I'd put TVI at net loss on this one. Their lawyers are going to make more money than they will.
That's not a net loss. If they lost money, it would be a net loss. If they make money, but less than the lawyers (e.g., they win a lot of money in the settlement, but the lawyers take 2/3 of it and leave them with only 1/3), they still made money. Which is a gain, not a loss, and is in the interest of the business.
There are ways to browse the web other than using a montior. Text-to-speech solution exist (intended for blind people), and you might be using something like a pda or a phone, for which I wouldn't describe the screen as a "monitor".
Slashdot Mirror
Burglarized. Or, you can use burgled, which is a back-formation from "burglar".
Absolutely, build a consensus for what you believe in.
Ok, now I'm confused. In the last sentence you were touting the importance of convincing people that you are right, and now you are saying building a consensus for what you believe in is bad? I give up.
Your analogy with drug prohibition seems apt, as you are using the same kind of paternalistic bullshit reasoning as the drug warriors. Why don't you let the recipient decide if they would rather have nothing? If they want to use free software, no one is stopping them from doing so. If they perfer to accept the donations instead, that's their business, not yours.
The Cable Guy wsa the beginning of his decline because it was his first big failure commercially. This is because dark comedies are hard to sell to a mainstream audience, and those who do like them don't coincide much with Carrey's fan base. It is not because he did a poor job acting in the movie.
Now that you mention it looks like a few of their other listing aren't complete either. For example, I believe that there were more than 16 games in the category of "8-bet / 16 bit platform game". And wasn't there a grand theft auto game before III? Or a mega man game between 4 and 8 other than "X".
Oh wait, maybe they're not trying to list every game ever made. I think a more reasonable criticism is how many games they aren't listing
Does anyone know what the point of this rule is? I can understand that they would want to keep the best resumes (out of the people they didn't hire) for the next opening(s), but why be required to keep all resumes on file?
Because a script kiddie would certainly respect and obey patent laws. And would abide by copyright law by not using a pirated version of the obfuscation program.
I didn't think that SMB was in the portion of the code that was leaked. Was it?
Given that the first exploit worked on ie5 but not on ie6, I think you can safely conclude that it had been taken care of.
Huh? The fact that something is made of something unhealthy that becomes downright carcinogenic when cooked and is full of diseases when not means that we are meant to eat it? This seems similar to asking "if god didn't want us to smoke cigarettes, why did he make them out of tobacco?".
Does anyone know how the "insensitive clod" thing got started? Found this on google. Did it get its start here from the simpsons?
This should be "if you're a cola drinker, but not a Pepsie driner, and you're an iTMS user". Otherwise, you might be a coke user whose valuation of the free song he could get is less than 99 cents.
I haven't read thinking in c++, so I can't comment on that. But I disagree with your assessment of thinking in java. There were some parts that taught basics as you mention (not just of programming, but also at length the basics of object-oriented design). However, once the basics were out of the way, the later sections explained features of the language extremely well. I definitely think the book is worth buying for these chapters. Rather than simply explaining what the language allows you to do, he explains why and how best to use it. This is not meant as a reference book on minutae of the language, it's meant to provide thorough discussions of the language's features that need to be read carefully. I am thinking in particular of the section on inner classes, which really enlightened me as to what inner classes are and how to use them.
Happy Valentine's Day, s0ylentgreen!
If they tried to do this, IBM or some other large company with interests in Linux would pay his legal fees. I guess this might be what you meant by someone else paying, but I think that a company (e.g., IBM or Redhat) would step in right away, and it woudn't be a question of how much public sympathy there would be.
I also think that SCO understands this and will avoid this path accordingly.
I apologize if you feel I misquoted you. I was trying to use "uses" as a synonym for "accesses," not "provides". I was using it in the same sense that you do above when you say you can't "prove that WMP uses undocumented APIs". In other words , I simply used the word "special" to mean secret and undocumented, whereas you directly used "undocumented". That doesn't seem like a gross misquoting, but if you feel it was, I apologize. This is why I usually quote directly using blockquotes, but I got lazy. I understood exactly what you meant, even if I paraphrased it poorly.
I wasn't trying to disprove anything. I never claimed that wmp doesn't use undocmented apis. I have no idea how wmp works internally. I simply asked you where you were getting your information from, since you stated wmp's access to non-public api's as fact. But you don't have any information on this and were just speculating based on similar incidents (I'm familiar with the antitrust trial) and stating that speculation as fact. Fine. Everything is clear now.
I'm not sure what you mean by this. The existing documentation on mshtml.dll seems pretty decent to me. If you haven't used it, here's documentation on one function chosen pretty much at random. I haven't had to use it that much, so I'm not that familiar with the limitations of the documentation. How is it crap?
I didn't mean provide full documentation of the API itself, I meant provide a news story, etc., saying that wmp uses "special api's".
Let's try this again. You say: "wmp uses special api's". I say "Really, I didn't know that. Please point me to more info on this, or at least tell me how you know this is true". And you say... what? I didn't really get an answer just that this is "well known". Well then there should be some info on it somewhere, right? Or, again, were you just making things up?
Care to provide a reference to which "better" API you are talking about? Or are you just making things up and assuming that since it sounds anti-msft, people will assume it's true? Because I can play that game too: linux can't compete with windows on the desktop, because windows has access to super-secret extra registers on intel chips that are hidden from linux. Wow, that was easy.
I agree. What happens if I go home tonight and create my own crappy media program that no one uses. Will they have to bundle that too? No? The EU seems to think it makes sense to give preference to a few products that they deem worthy. This doesn't seem like a good way for business to operate at all.
Eh? You seem to be quoting a piece of software. Is this quip in the code somewhere?
True. But the same is also true of linux, etc.
Since he ended at -1, I don't think that proved it. His post is modded up, which causes people to react by pointing out what's wrong with it, and it immediately dives to -1. So the system works okay in my opinion, provided that the post doesn't spend too long at 5 before getting struck down to -1. I think that he did show that some poeple react to the tone of authority (by the fact that anyone modded him up at all), but not that the moderation system is broken. More of a statement on human nature than on slashdot.
That's not a net loss. If they lost money, it would be a net loss. If they make money, but less than the lawyers (e.g., they win a lot of money in the settlement, but the lawyers take 2/3 of it and leave them with only 1/3), they still made money. Which is a gain, not a loss, and is in the interest of the business.
There are ways to browse the web other than using a montior. Text-to-speech solution exist (intended for blind people), and you might be using something like a pda or a phone, for which I wouldn't describe the screen as a "monitor".