I will only trust reviews that benchmark the latest and greatest games that I will be buying these cards for, whoever can run them fastest at that particular time IS WHAT IM GOING TO BUY.
I would rather see a benchmark based on an obscure game that has a fairly high performance requirement, not on the latest and greatest high-performance highly-advertised game.
"Optimized for best performance on games X Y and Z" does nothing for me when I want to run games Q R and S.
Let's call it an application-specific enhancement! Their lawyers will stare blankly, but any geek shopping for a video card will read right through it!
However, the majority of people shopping for a video card aren't geeks but rather Little Johnny's out with some of Mom's cash wanting to get a high-performance card for his "this will help him with his homework, now he can write book reports at home" P4 3.0 4gb box.
So you're have a right to privacy if you're a "normal" person, but if you somehow become a celebrity, all of a sudden you're a different class of person to whom a different set of rights apply ?
Pretty much, yeah.
Most "celebrities" actively work toward being celebrities. After spending however-much time crying, "Hey, look at me!", it's hard to justify saying, "Go away and stop looking" when it becomes inconvenient.
if you were as famous as Streisand, and even as remotely despised, and had several stalker problems (probably most stalkers out of dislike rather than infatuation), you'd most likely have problems with this.
If you were as famous as Streisand... What an interesting choice of words.
How did Streisand become famous? I suggest it is because she devoted a great deal of her life making a career out of getting people to look at her and pay attention to her. That is, after all, what a "celebrity" does, by and large.
So, now that she has what she worked for most of her life (fame, people looking at her) and she suddenly decides that she doesn't want that any more? Or that she wants it only on her terms?
Do you see a problem with this? Something along the lines of "be careful what you wish for", perhaps?
I think this is mostly a case of "be careful what you wish for."
So-called "celebrities" generally spend much of their life saying, in effect, "Look at me! See me! Here I am! Look! Look!". Then, when they have arrived and people really ARE looking at them, they decide, "Hey, I want my privacy."
Well, you can't have it both ways, and if they want their privacy they shouldn't spend so much time and effort making a career out of creating publicity and a buzz around themselves and their lives.
122 Main wouldn't be next to 124 Main - it could be several spots down the block,
You don't have to go to Tokyo to find this. I have personal experience with this situation.
The lots on my street are small 25-foot lots, so most of the buildings occupy two or three lots and therefore "occupy" two or three actual street addresses (according to the official city map). I have three lots side-by-side and the official number of the lot beside one of mine is wrong. It goes 213 Main, 217 Main, 215 Main, 219 Main...
SCO literally has nothing to lose here. And that is the problem.
That seems to be the way SCO is playing it, but methinks reality will play out rather differently. SCO has engendered enough ill will that even if it wins it will lose.
You missed the point.
SCO has what amounts to nothing right now, i.e. an aging Unix that nobody is currently interested in licensing and a Linux distribution that most people have been pretty much ignoring in favour of competing distributions.
Therefore, SCO is in a position where one of three things can happen.
(a) SCO does nothing, the company fails and goes bankrupt and is worthless. (b)The company sues IBM and loses, SCO goes bankrupt and is worthless. (c)The company sues IBM and obtains a judgement or a settlement, or gets bought out. SCO is suddenly worth something.
As you can see, the first two scenarios (do nothing or lose the lawsuit) have the same outcome and the third is the jackpot. In their situation, why not go for the jackpot?
So, you are the only person I've ever met who BELIEVES that MS is doing this to do something good for society? MS does not do anything that is not good for MS.
They literally CAN'T do anything that's not good for MS. They have an obligation to their stockholders and would be setting themselves up for one helluva lawsuit for negligence and derilection of duty if they did otherwise.
Do companies really exchange formatted documents with the government all the time ?
With government offices and agencies, and with other businesses, and among themselves.
Of course!
There are many occasions where I've received a MS Office doc file containing one or two sentences of simple text. "Here is the price that you asked for. We currently have 300 in inventory."
Many secretaries, warehouse monkeys and the like honestly have no idea that you can use MS Outlook to actually type text into. They just use it to send Word attachments.
In that kind of situation, why even bother with counterfeiting. Just throw a 1$ bill instead of a 5$, and by the time the clerk notices, you're already too far away to do anything about it...
That's less likely to succeed here than in the USA because our money is different colours depending on the denomination.
What you would think is more likely to occur doesn't, all that much. That is where someone walks in with a big handful of pennies, nickels, dimes and quarters and dumps them on the counter. "Sorry, this is all I had. That's $5 there." I always just scoop the whole thing into the drawer, say "Thank you," and hand the guy his ticket. Counting it later, it's always $5. Sometimes it's $5.10 or something, but it's very very rare that it's short and if it ever is, it's short by maybe five cents.
And that would be easy to get away with. But people just don't do it.
Canadian Tire is a hardware, lawn-and-garden, and automotive parts chain. They issue "Canadian Tire money" along with your purchase; it's a kind of a bonus that you can spend on your next purchase at Canadian Tire.
They have been doing this for years and years, so everyone is familiar with Canadian Tire money now.
Also useful (particularly for the clubs mentioned in the lead-in) the strips also fluoresce under UV in different colors.
"Particularly for the clubs"??
How so? The waitress comes by with a tray of drinks for a bunch of half-drunk guys sitting at a table in the dark, most of whom throw a bill or two at her and get on with their conversation. What is the waitress to do at that point? Pull her handy black light out and start scanning each bill? The guys at the next table are yelling for service, one of the guys at this table is trying to grab her skirt, and the bartender is loading another round of drinks on a tray for her to carry off.
In real life, I run a movie theatre. When I'm selling tickets and it gets close to showtime, I have people walking in, literally throwing a wadded-up bill at me, and continuing right on into the theatre without ever stopping. And the next twenty or thirty or fifty guys behind them do exactly the same thing. Stop and check each bill for anything?? Heck, I'm lucky if I can just smooth them fast enough to get them into the drawer (and sometimes I can't; they end up in a little pile until things slow down a bit.) I don't think this is really unusual in many businesses. There simply isn't time or opportunity to do a thorough "investigation" when someone hands you money. All of the security features in the world are really of no value in these situations; that's just the way that it is.
Over the years, over 100 subcontractors, some of which no longer exist as companies, were involved in writing the code that makes up Solaris.
So?
It amazes me that outfits as large as Sun don't insure that they receive all rights to code written under contract to them at the time that they hand over the cheque.
It's obvious to my grandmother that when she hires someone to build a house for her, she should receive clear title to the house on completion; why is this such a difficult concept for IT corporatons to grasp?
You *do* realize that at-home voting compromises the secret ballot, right?
Agreed.
It becomes possible for someone trying to force or bribe the voter to vote a certain way to demand proof that he voted the desired way, something not possible with voting at a properly supervised voting station.
It is still possible, but you have to scale up the intimidation to make it work. I believe this was done in Chicago in the past.
Basically, you make it known that if Candidate A does not win in a particular ward/borough/constituency, then very bad things will happen in that ward.
Individual intimidation may also be required, but ultimately if enough folks get the message, then things will happen as "requested".
I forget the name of the convention/treaty, but in certain countries, for instance, if you don't put the "(C)" in there, it isn't copyright..
I remember reading some years back that the (C) or (c) is not sufficient. You have to either spell out the word Copyright in its entirity, or use the c-in-a-circle symbol. (c) doesn't mean anything.
It's amazing how many odd places actually exist. I'm familiar with a street called Raggedy Ass Road in Yellowknife, NWT (Canada). It's amusing to imagine someone who lives on that street trying to order merchandise online or over the phone.
"My address is 123 Raggedy Ass Road." "Sure buddy. *click*"
Not divulging only hurts their punitive damages possibilities.
That should be actual damages, not punitive damages. Punitive damages, i.e. "punishment for wrongdoing" would not be affected by after-the-fact changing of source code. Actual damages, on the other hand, would be reduced after the infringement is withdrawn from circulation.
Compare this to an assault on a person. If someone assaults me, I can sue them for punitive damages (they assaulted me, for ghawd sake!) and for actual damages (I incurred a hospital bill and lost time fromm work). But I have to take steps to minimize the actual damages that I suffer; if I tell my assailant, "Hit me again and break my arm" then I can't sue for additional damages if my arm is subsequently broken.
Besides, it's not as if a company computer would be the professor's private property. You shouldn't store anything on their computers that you wouldn't want others to see.
In the interest of accuracy, the article states that the computer was actually the professor's home computer (and presumably his own personal property). He had brought it from home because it was malfunctioning and he wanted the technicians to repair it for him.
Obviously, one would include some evidence. Send an email which reads "I found this on Foo Bar's computer" and attach one of the images. Sure, someone could be falsely accused in this manner, but the accuser would need to have gained access to the picture from somewhere.
I'm pretty sure that most of we folks reading Slashdot would be able to find some pretty horrible images without too much effort. So, all one needs do is find an image, attach it to an "anonymous email" and watch anyone's computer equipment being confiscated by the police?
Pardon me for stating that I have a problem with this scenario.
because for civil lawsuits, you can bring a suit against anyone in the world, they dont have to pay though, as long as they dont come to america.
And what happens if someone who's been sued in this way does visit the USA at some point? Do they put him in jail until payment is made or something? If I go somewhere it's not like I carry the deeds to all of my property and the complete contents of my bank accounts along in my suitcase. Someone might be able to seize the $20 in my wallet, but how would they go about getting my other assets if they are not conveniently in my pocket at that moment?
Please tell me who is being paid to use Microsoft!
Secretaries, "executive assistants" and data entry folks worldwide. And lots more too, but I think the above would make up the largest number of users, overall.
The current most theoretically efficient method discovered is what's known as the "Metropolis II" layout after the algorithm used to design it (I'd offer you a link to it, but you need to be an ACM subscriber to get at the paper, and as far as I know tyhe keyboard layout itself has never been made publically available for use)
Slashdot Mirror
I will only trust reviews that benchmark the latest and greatest games that I will be buying these cards for, whoever can run them fastest at that particular time IS WHAT IM GOING TO BUY.
I would rather see a benchmark based on an obscure game that has a fairly high performance requirement, not on the latest and greatest high-performance highly-advertised game.
"Optimized for best performance on games X Y and Z" does nothing for me when I want to run games Q R and S.
Let's call it an application-specific enhancement! Their lawyers will stare blankly, but any geek shopping for a video card will read right through it!
However, the majority of people shopping for a video card aren't geeks but rather Little Johnny's out with some of Mom's cash wanting to get a high-performance card for his "this will help him with his homework, now he can write book reports at home" P4 3.0 4gb box.
So you're have a right to privacy if you're a "normal" person, but if you somehow become a celebrity, all of a sudden you're a different class of person to whom a different set of rights apply ?
Pretty much, yeah.
Most "celebrities" actively work toward being celebrities. After spending however-much time crying, "Hey, look at me!", it's hard to justify saying, "Go away and stop looking" when it becomes inconvenient.
if you were as famous as Streisand, and even as remotely despised, and had several stalker problems (probably most stalkers out of dislike rather than infatuation), you'd most likely have problems with this.
If you were as famous as Streisand... What an interesting choice of words.
How did Streisand become famous? I suggest it is because she devoted a great deal of her life making a career out of getting people to look at her and pay attention to her. That is, after all, what a "celebrity" does, by and large.
So, now that she has what she worked for most of her life (fame, people looking at her) and she suddenly decides that she doesn't want that any more? Or that she wants it only on her terms?
Do you see a problem with this? Something along the lines of "be careful what you wish for", perhaps?
I think this is mostly a case of "be careful what you wish for."
So-called "celebrities" generally spend much of their life saying, in effect, "Look at me! See me! Here I am! Look! Look!". Then, when they have arrived and people really ARE looking at them, they decide, "Hey, I want my privacy."
Well, you can't have it both ways, and if they want their privacy they shouldn't spend so much time and effort making a career out of creating publicity and a buzz around themselves and their lives.
As I said, be careful what you wish for.
122 Main wouldn't be next to 124 Main - it could be several spots down the block,
You don't have to go to Tokyo to find this. I have personal experience with this situation.
The lots on my street are small 25-foot lots, so most of the buildings occupy two or three lots and therefore "occupy" two or three actual street addresses (according to the official city map). I have three lots side-by-side and the official number of the lot beside one of mine is wrong. It goes 213 Main, 217 Main, 215 Main, 219 Main...
Why? Ghawd knows, but it's been that way forever.
SCO literally has nothing to lose here. And that is the problem.
That seems to be the way SCO is playing it, but methinks reality will play out rather differently. SCO has engendered enough ill will that even if it wins it will lose.
You missed the point.
SCO has what amounts to nothing right now, i.e. an aging Unix that nobody is currently interested in licensing and a Linux distribution that most people have been pretty much ignoring in favour of competing distributions.
Therefore, SCO is in a position where one of three things can happen.
(a) SCO does nothing, the company fails and goes bankrupt and is worthless.
(b)The company sues IBM and loses, SCO goes bankrupt and is worthless.
(c)The company sues IBM and obtains a judgement or a settlement, or gets bought out. SCO is suddenly worth something.
As you can see, the first two scenarios (do nothing or lose the lawsuit) have the same outcome and the third is the jackpot. In their situation, why not go for the jackpot?
Want logic games?
Try some of the games in Mame (also available for Linux/Unix) such as: Boxy Boy, Chicken Shift, Logic Pro, Logic Pro 2, Phozon, Pushman, and Wise Guy.
Some of these can are real real brain-busters.
So, you are the only person I've ever met who BELIEVES that MS is doing this to do something good for society? MS does not do anything that is not good for MS.
They literally CAN'T do anything that's not good for MS. They have an obligation to their stockholders and would be setting themselves up for one helluva lawsuit for negligence and derilection of duty if they did otherwise.
There's canopener.ca but it appears to be Canada-only.
Do companies really exchange formatted documents with the government all the time ?
With government offices and agencies, and with other businesses, and among themselves.
Of course!
There are many occasions where I've received a MS Office doc file containing one or two sentences of simple text. "Here is the price that you asked for. We currently have 300 in inventory."
Many secretaries, warehouse monkeys and the like honestly have no idea that you can use MS Outlook to actually type text into. They just use it to send Word attachments.
In that kind of situation, why even bother with counterfeiting. Just throw a 1$ bill instead of a 5$, and by the time the clerk notices, you're already too far away to do anything about it...
That's less likely to succeed here than in the USA because our money is different colours depending on the denomination.
What you would think is more likely to occur doesn't, all that much. That is where someone walks in with a big handful of pennies, nickels, dimes and quarters and dumps them on the counter. "Sorry, this is all I had. That's $5 there." I always just scoop the whole thing into the drawer, say "Thank you," and hand the guy his ticket. Counting it later, it's always $5. Sometimes it's $5.10 or something, but it's very very rare that it's short and if it ever is, it's short by maybe five cents.
And that would be easy to get away with. But people just don't do it.
Canadian Tire is a hardware, lawn-and-garden, and automotive parts chain. They issue "Canadian Tire money" along with your purchase; it's a kind of a bonus that you can spend on your next purchase at Canadian Tire.
They have been doing this for years and years, so everyone is familiar with Canadian Tire money now.
Also useful (particularly for the clubs mentioned in the lead-in) the strips also fluoresce under UV in different colors.
"Particularly for the clubs"??
How so? The waitress comes by with a tray of drinks for a bunch of half-drunk guys sitting at a table in the dark, most of whom throw a bill or two at her and get on with their conversation. What is the waitress to do at that point? Pull her handy black light out and start scanning each bill? The guys at the next table are yelling for service, one of the guys at this table is trying to grab her skirt, and the bartender is loading another round of drinks on a tray for her to carry off.
In real life, I run a movie theatre. When I'm selling tickets and it gets close to showtime, I have people walking in, literally throwing a wadded-up bill at me, and continuing right on into the theatre without ever stopping. And the next twenty or thirty or fifty guys behind them do exactly the same thing. Stop and check each bill for anything?? Heck, I'm lucky if I can just smooth them fast enough to get them into the drawer (and sometimes I can't; they end up in a little pile until things slow down a bit.) I don't think this is really unusual in many businesses. There simply isn't time or opportunity to do a thorough "investigation" when someone hands you money. All of the security features in the world are really of no value in these situations; that's just the way that it is.
The end result was MKULTRIX
The little-known sequel to Mortal Kombat 4!
Over the years, over 100 subcontractors, some of which no longer exist as companies, were involved in writing the code that makes up Solaris.
So?
It amazes me that outfits as large as Sun don't insure that they receive all rights to code written under contract to them at the time that they hand over the cheque.
It's obvious to my grandmother that when she hires someone to build a house for her, she should receive clear title to the house on completion; why is this such a difficult concept for IT corporatons to grasp?
You *do* realize that at-home voting compromises the secret ballot, right?
Agreed.
It becomes possible for someone trying to force or bribe the voter to vote a certain way to demand proof that he voted the desired way, something not possible with voting at a properly supervised voting station.
It is still possible, but you have to scale up the intimidation to make it work. I believe this was done in Chicago in the past.
Basically, you make it known that if Candidate A does not win in a particular ward/borough/constituency, then very bad things will happen in that ward.
Individual intimidation may also be required, but ultimately if enough folks get the message, then things will happen as "requested".
I forget the name of the convention/treaty, but in certain countries, for instance, if you don't put the "(C)" in there, it isn't copyright..
I remember reading some years back that the (C) or (c) is not sufficient. You have to either spell out the word Copyright in its entirity, or use the c-in-a-circle symbol. (c) doesn't mean anything.
It's amazing how many odd places actually exist. I'm familiar with a street called Raggedy Ass Road in Yellowknife, NWT (Canada). It's amusing to imagine someone who lives on that street trying to order merchandise online or over the phone.
"My address is 123 Raggedy Ass Road."
"Sure buddy. *click*"
Not divulging only hurts their punitive damages possibilities.
That should be actual damages, not punitive damages. Punitive damages, i.e. "punishment for wrongdoing" would not be affected by after-the-fact changing of source code. Actual damages, on the other hand, would be reduced after the infringement is withdrawn from circulation.
Compare this to an assault on a person. If someone assaults me, I can sue them for punitive damages (they assaulted me, for ghawd sake!) and for actual damages (I incurred a hospital bill and lost time fromm work). But I have to take steps to minimize the actual damages that I suffer; if I tell my assailant, "Hit me again and break my arm" then I can't sue for additional damages if my arm is subsequently broken.
Besides, it's not as if a company computer would be the professor's private property. You shouldn't store anything on their computers that you wouldn't want others to see.
In the interest of accuracy, the article states that the computer was actually the professor's home computer (and presumably his own personal property). He had brought it from home because it was malfunctioning and he wanted the technicians to repair it for him.
Obviously, one would include some evidence. Send an email which reads "I found this on Foo Bar's computer" and attach one of the images. Sure, someone could be falsely accused in this manner, but the accuser would need to have gained access to the picture from somewhere.
I'm pretty sure that most of we folks reading Slashdot would be able to find some pretty horrible images without too much effort. So, all one needs do is find an image, attach it to an "anonymous email" and watch anyone's computer equipment being confiscated by the police?
Pardon me for stating that I have a problem with this scenario.
because for civil lawsuits, you can bring a suit against anyone in the world, they dont have to pay though, as long as they dont come to america.
And what happens if someone who's been sued in this way does visit the USA at some point? Do they put him in jail until payment is made or something? If I go somewhere it's not like I carry the deeds to all of my property and the complete contents of my bank accounts along in my suitcase. Someone might be able to seize the $20 in my wallet, but how would they go about getting my other assets if they are not conveniently in my pocket at that moment?
Please tell me who is being paid to use Microsoft!
Secretaries, "executive assistants" and data entry folks worldwide. And lots more too, but I think the above would make up the largest number of users, overall.
The current most theoretically efficient method discovered is what's known as the "Metropolis II" layout after the algorithm used to design it (I'd offer you a link to it, but you need to be an ACM subscriber to get at the paper, and as far as I know tyhe keyboard layout itself has never been made publically available for use)
You mean this?