It's not a nondescript name - it is in fact about the most descriptive name you could possibly give a database! It is an SQL server. You can't even talk about SQL servers without making at least a subconscious connection to MS SQL Server (and almost everyone I know calls it just "SQL Server").
Rant about MS subverting yet another generic term for one of its product names, but as a marketing tool, it's a stroke of genius. Cute names are funny and appeal to techies, but "does what it says on the tin" names make a good, strong association with the product type.
(Note that I'm not commenting on the fitness of MS SQL Server, just its name)
Or explain it in the Help, or hell just include a single page of help text describing the core options in about:config (ie the ones used by FF itself, not extensions).
I'm old and cranky; I don't think I should have to search the web just to find out that an option can be tweaked, let alone how to tweak it, what the valid values are and what each or them means.
Why would it not be? For that matter, why would it not be okay to post a single, polite message along the lines of "Hey, we're doing great things over here and have openings if anyone's interested" even if the deal hadn't been made?
Spamming the list with repeated messages would be wrong, as would making threats, lying, etc. I don't see how a single, polite invitation to switch groups would be wrong at almost any time, though.
Well, it's not an original story, it's not an original concept, it's not the first adaptation of a graphic novel, it's not the first to use elements of comic book style in its cinematography (Hulk did that too at least) - need I go on?
Just goes to show that you didn't see this film.
I've seen it a number of times; my daughter has it on DVD. I didn't say it was an exact copy of the first one (or of the book), I was disputing that it was an original film. Besides, apart from the sub-plot of Wonka's dysfunctional relationship with his father and the flash-backs, the two films are (of course) very similar. "The same as the old one, with extra bits and different songs" doesn't make it original.
Again, I'm not saying that either film was bad (although the end of Sin City was a little bleak for my taste and I'm not convinced the cinematography truly worked), just that they're not what I'd use as examples of original content.
A British film, and based on existing characters; not a sequel as such, but not entirely original either.
King Kong
A remake.
Sin City
Based on a graphic novel.
Pride and Prejudice
Made at least once before, if not more, and based on a book.
War of the Worlds
Remake of a film based on a book.
House of Flying Daggers
Was that a Hollywood film? (Genuine question)
Charlie and the Chocolate Factory
A remake of a film based on a book.
Layer Cake
British.
Match Point
I thought this was British, but could be wrong.
Chronicles of Narnia
Remake.
Now, I'm not saying that they're not good films, but I don't think that that list is really a good example of original Hollywood films of the last year...
Access to the source is irrelevant, these are patents we're talking about, not copyright. If functional aspect $foo is patented and an application implements it without a licence from the patent holder, it's in violation of the patent, it's that simple. You don't need to see the source to see that - either the widget/process/UI element/whatever is there, or it isn't.
t will then most probably not exist in an separate european version because of the amount of work for the developers which would be needed to maintain two versions.
I believe we have one or two programmers of our own here in the EU...
The cameras now have attached megaphones so they can scold you as well.
Correction - a tiny number of cameras in one or two locations have speakers attached. Also, citing the Daily Hate (or any tabloid really) should only be done as a last resort; you never know quite how much of a bias they've put on their report, depending on what they're currently demonising.
Of course I parsed the original sentence; how else would I be able to supply a criticism and correction? I think perhaps you need to brush up on your reasoning skills.
Yes, the radiation is present in the UK, but that's almost irrelevant. If I said that someone was poisoned by radiation in the reactor room at Chernobyl, you would understand that to mean that the radiation in the reactor room at Chernobyl poisoned them. "Former spy poisoned by radiation in UK" has exactly the same sentence structure, yet you don't see the problem with it?
I know what it means; it just doesn't say what it means.
No, this is slashdot, where we read an inaccurate, third-hand interpretation of the abstract of a patent (not the claims), then check to see who it was granted to, and rubbish or support it based on that.
He wasn't poisoned by radiation in the UK, he was poisoned in the UK by radiation.
The former implies that it was the radiation present in the UK that poisoned him; the latter makes it clear that he happened to be in the UK when he was poisoned by radiation.
When I go away I have to at least check my phone messages once a day, even with the trained monkey in my place things can still go wrong.
Dude, you're on holiday - it's not your problem. If your colleagues can't cope without you, it's better that the management team realise that quickly and either train them up or replace them; otherwise, you'll be stuck wasting your precious holiday time working. No-one lies on their death bed, wishing they'd spent more time in the office.
It's a tragic fact of society that things need to be fixed yesterday, unfortunately this seeps into holiday time.
No, never, no way, no how. You want me to cancel/postpone my holiday to work instead, we can discuss matters. You want me to just take a chunk out of my holiday time to work without any intention of compensating me, either monetarily or with time off in lieu, forget it. I can always get another job; I can never get more time.
Don't get me wrong, when I'm at work I work hard and get the job done on time (where possible) and to the best of my ability. When I'm on my own time though, that's my time, not my employer's. If they want it, then we can discuss suitable remuneration. This is business; they'd not give stuff away for free (without an ulterior motive), they have no right to expect me to do so.
It really depends very much on how the seating plan is set out. I've worked in a couple of open plan offices. One was an absolute nightmare - it was far too loud, and very difficult to concentrate properly in. I got far more work done out of hours than in, and was irritated and frustrated for much of the working day.
My current one is much, much better. I'm sat in a relatively small area, with just programmers, testers and a couple of project managers. No sales guys and account managers barking down the phone, no sysadmins yelling at each other, etc. I'm still not distraction-free, and still not as productive as I could be, but the irritation and stress levels are way down.
I can't point at any studies, but my personal experience is that when I was working in a noisy office environment, my concentration and productivity did suffer. I know this absolutely, as I got far more work done (and of better quality) on those occasions when I was in over the weekend or on a public holiday. Now, some of that will be due to the focussing effect of working on my own time, it's true, but by no means all of it.
Fortunately, we've since moved offices and I'm lucky enough to be currently sat in quite a good spot, noise-wise. I'm definitely more productive here than I have been even in other areas of the same office, let alone in the previous, "everyone in a single area" completely open plan one.
Surely if it absorbed all the light, it would be completely invisible, not black?
No, because if it was invisible you'd be able to see what was behind it; if it merely absorbs the light that falls on it, you'd see a black shape instead...
Slashdot Mirror
Blame MS for picking a nondescript name.
It's not a nondescript name - it is in fact about the most descriptive name you could possibly give a database! It is an SQL server. You can't even talk about SQL servers without making at least a subconscious connection to MS SQL Server (and almost everyone I know calls it just "SQL Server").
Rant about MS subverting yet another generic term for one of its product names, but as a marketing tool, it's a stroke of genius. Cute names are funny and appeal to techies, but "does what it says on the tin" names make a good, strong association with the product type.
(Note that I'm not commenting on the fitness of MS SQL Server, just its name)
I wish I had mod points. Hmmm - haven't had any for months.
I haven't had any for years - in fact for a year or two, I couldn't even meta-mod. Clearly I offended somebody somehow...
Or explain it in the Help, or hell just include a single page of help text describing the core options in about:config (ie the ones used by FF itself, not extensions).
I'm old and cranky; I don't think I should have to search the web just to find out that an option can be tweaked, let alone how to tweak it, what the valid values are and what each or them means.
Why would it not be? For that matter, why would it not be okay to post a single, polite message along the lines of "Hey, we're doing great things over here and have openings if anyone's interested" even if the deal hadn't been made?
Spamming the list with repeated messages would be wrong, as would making threats, lying, etc. I don't see how a single, polite invitation to switch groups would be wrong at almost any time, though.
More likely, especially given IBM's pay-out, is that the submitter left off an m (for million)...
Since when does this make it an unoriginal film?
Well, it's not an original story, it's not an original concept, it's not the first adaptation of a graphic novel, it's not the first to use elements of comic book style in its cinematography (Hulk did that too at least) - need I go on?
Just goes to show that you didn't see this film.
I've seen it a number of times; my daughter has it on DVD. I didn't say it was an exact copy of the first one (or of the book), I was disputing that it was an original film. Besides, apart from the sub-plot of Wonka's dysfunctional relationship with his father and the flash-backs, the two films are (of course) very similar. "The same as the old one, with extra bits and different songs" doesn't make it original.
Again, I'm not saying that either film was bad (although the end of Sin City was a little bleak for my taste and I'm not convinced the cinematography truly worked), just that they're not what I'd use as examples of original content.
Some view smoking marijuana as morally wrong but people spend decades in prison here for smoking a joint.
Decades inside just for smoking a joint? Do you have any sources to back that claim up?
Wallace and Grommit
A British film, and based on existing characters; not a sequel as such, but not entirely original either.
King Kong
A remake.
Sin City
Based on a graphic novel.
Pride and Prejudice
Made at least once before, if not more, and based on a book.
War of the Worlds
Remake of a film based on a book.
House of Flying Daggers
Was that a Hollywood film? (Genuine question)
Charlie and the Chocolate Factory
A remake of a film based on a book.
Layer Cake
British.
Match Point
I thought this was British, but could be wrong.
Chronicles of Narnia
Remake.
Now, I'm not saying that they're not good films, but I don't think that that list is really a good example of original Hollywood films of the last year...
That's a somewhat ironic comment given the topic of conversation...
Access to the source is irrelevant, these are patents we're talking about, not copyright. If functional aspect $foo is patented and an application implements it without a licence from the patent holder, it's in violation of the patent, it's that simple. You don't need to see the source to see that - either the widget/process/UI element/whatever is there, or it isn't.
t will then most probably not exist in an separate european version because of the amount of work for the developers which would be needed to maintain two versions.
I believe we have one or two programmers of our own here in the EU...
I have a shift key you can borrow if you like.
The cameras now have attached megaphones so they can scold you as well.
Correction - a tiny number of cameras in one or two locations have speakers attached. Also, citing the Daily Hate (or any tabloid really) should only be done as a last resort; you never know quite how much of a bias they've put on their report, depending on what they're currently demonising.
Of course I parsed the original sentence; how else would I be able to supply a criticism and correction? I think perhaps you need to brush up on your reasoning skills.
Yes, the radiation is present in the UK, but that's almost irrelevant. If I said that someone was poisoned by radiation in the reactor room at Chernobyl, you would understand that to mean that the radiation in the reactor room at Chernobyl poisoned them. "Former spy poisoned by radiation in UK" has exactly the same sentence structure, yet you don't see the problem with it?
I know what it means; it just doesn't say what it means.
Maybe someone should read the patent in question?
No, this is slashdot, where we read an inaccurate, third-hand interpretation of the abstract of a patent (not the claims), then check to see who it was granted to, and rubbish or support it based on that.
Zero wing has a lot to answer for...
He wasn't poisoned by radiation in the UK, he was poisoned in the UK by radiation.
The former implies that it was the radiation present in the UK that poisoned him; the latter makes it clear that he happened to be in the UK when he was poisoned by radiation.
When I go away I have to at least check my phone messages once a day, even with the trained monkey in my place things can still go wrong.
Dude, you're on holiday - it's not your problem. If your colleagues can't cope without you, it's better that the management team realise that quickly and either train them up or replace them; otherwise, you'll be stuck wasting your precious holiday time working. No-one lies on their death bed, wishing they'd spent more time in the office.
It's a tragic fact of society that things need to be fixed yesterday, unfortunately this seeps into holiday time.
No, never, no way, no how. You want me to cancel/postpone my holiday to work instead, we can discuss matters. You want me to just take a chunk out of my holiday time to work without any intention of compensating me, either monetarily or with time off in lieu, forget it. I can always get another job; I can never get more time.
Don't get me wrong, when I'm at work I work hard and get the job done on time (where possible) and to the best of my ability. When I'm on my own time though, that's my time, not my employer's. If they want it, then we can discuss suitable remuneration. This is business; they'd not give stuff away for free (without an ulterior motive), they have no right to expect me to do so.
The story on Slashdot mentions iPods and MP3 formats, but it's unlikely the law will.
Of course it doesn't; the law is solely concerned with the licensing of FM transmissions and transmitters.
So how does a company that needs to test its products on Vista Home virtualise it?
It really depends very much on how the seating plan is set out. I've worked in a couple of open plan offices. One was an absolute nightmare - it was far too loud, and very difficult to concentrate properly in. I got far more work done out of hours than in, and was irritated and frustrated for much of the working day.
My current one is much, much better. I'm sat in a relatively small area, with just programmers, testers and a couple of project managers. No sales guys and account managers barking down the phone, no sysadmins yelling at each other, etc. I'm still not distraction-free, and still not as productive as I could be, but the irritation and stress levels are way down.
I can't point at any studies, but my personal experience is that when I was working in a noisy office environment, my concentration and productivity did suffer. I know this absolutely, as I got far more work done (and of better quality) on those occasions when I was in over the weekend or on a public holiday. Now, some of that will be due to the focussing effect of working on my own time, it's true, but by no means all of it.
Fortunately, we've since moved offices and I'm lucky enough to be currently sat in quite a good spot, noise-wise. I'm definitely more productive here than I have been even in other areas of the same office, let alone in the previous, "everyone in a single area" completely open plan one.
They don't 'own' their language any more than Prince Charles owns British English
Of course not, that would be ridiculous - everyone knows that it's the Queen's English...
Surely if it absorbed all the light, it would be completely invisible, not black?
No, because if it was invisible you'd be able to see what was behind it; if it merely absorbs the light that falls on it, you'd see a black shape instead...
How ironic, given your sig.