I think you'd better shut the fuck up, moron, before you start claiming that you have the right not to have photons enter your property.
Actually, if you have an excessively bright light on too late at night, you'll likely end up in trouble for that, too.
I don't think anyone is trying to claim that they have a right to absolute silence. However, legally speaking we do have the right not to be subjected to noise (or light) at too high a level. It would be far preferable if people were considerate enough to not make it a problem in the first place, of course, but unfortunately that's not always the case.
How thick do these walls have to be? Because I've certainly heard other people's music through mine late at night in the past.
I don't care what you do out of sight or earshot of me; I only potentially have a problem with it if I can see or hear it. You have no right to impose your choice of music on those around you.
I ended up having to buy a separate sound card (Audigy 2) to replace the onboard sound support for my girlfriend's PC, as it became all but unusable. Running anything even slightly intensive caused massive sound drop outs and distortions. For instance, the sound for the "splash movie" in Sims 2 was screwed, as was in-game sound.
As opposed to the non-GC way, where you can destroy an object at any time, free its memory, and then segfault when you try to dereference a pointer that still existed elsewhere in the code. (Or try to free() it twice, and bomb out that way)
Overall, I prefer working in a garbage collected environment. You're right in that having a garbage collector in no way prevents memory leaks though. It means that you can't forget to call free(), but it doesn't guarantee to free the RAM. In fact, any given object may *never* be garbage collected, if the RAM is never needed (depending on the implementation of the garbage collector, VM parameters, etc)
It's not just that - even things like it being based on the Doom 3 engine rather than the Quake 3 one *may* be NDAd (yes, that was in the article, but it's an example of something that could be under an NDA)
I've worked on projects before where even the *existence* of the project was under NDA - I literally can't tell you what the project was about. (At the other extreme of course, there are open source projects.)
Well, your friend had better hope that they lie the other side of whatever he's told you. Assuming that they do, you can tell us everything you know. Assuming that they don't, you probably shouldn't have said this much...
I'm with Orange in the UK, and for £22.5 a month I get about 200 any time, any network voice minutes and (thanks to a special offer when I signed up) 500 text messages included.
What right is being violated or threatened here? The servers belong to HP, the way I see it they have the right to delete anything they want. It might not be nice, but that's an entirely different matter.
Slashdot editors, can you at least *try* to keep the section on topic please?
Simple reply: tough. GET requests must be idempotent, they should not change state and absolutely must not change state destructively. You should be able to make the same GET request multiple times without affecting anything.
This is because with a POST request, if you hit refresh, the browser warns you that you're about to submit information, and that there may be undesirable consequences - Firefox explicitly mentions resubmitting an order for example. With a GET request there is no such warning. What if someone accidentally bookmarks the result of a GET that deletes some data, or similar? They may not even realise the damage they're causing while they empty the database.
As for extra effort, I really don't see it I'm afraid. I've been working on web-based applications for 6 years, and of all the things that have caused me pain, POST vs GET simply isn't one of them; it's a non-issue, once you understand when it is appropriate to use GET and when you should use POST.
It can't ignore the hosts file, that's an OS-level thing. It may in a sense bypass the hosts file, by retrieving a cached version of the page that contains the advert that would normally be blocked, but it's not ignoring the hosts file as such.
Actually, there's almost certainly nothing it can do about this, unless the cache is set to only cache HTML and images originating from the original server, forcing the browser to re-request items from other servers. That would somewhat diminish the point of the cache, though, and may be difficult to implement (I've not thought it through properly, and I really ought to be getting to bed)
Y'know, just saying "intellectual property" would have sufficed. Putting quotes around the words individually makes it look as though you're questioning the words individually, rather than as a phrase, which is not what you meant.
To answer your question, no, they will not. They are a company, and so exist to make money. IP helps companies such as MS make money, therefore they - naturally - have a particular view on it, and will want to make that view known.
Sexual preference, on the other hand, has absolutely nothing to do with them. It's good that they're taking a positive stance, but it's hardly important to their bottom line. From that point of view, there's no need for them to concern themselves with such debates, hence they won't.
Someone is always going to get screwed over, but it isn't the start ups or MS.
Then who is it? MS and the start-ups win, the venture capitalists will make sure they get their money, the public have another shiny toy available to buy if they wish, the economy is improved by some small amount - who loses?
MS wants these startup to use MS-only tech and be locked in.
And if they *are* "just a MS Word doc", what are they going to be locked-in to? A licencing deal? Big deal - that happens all the time, and no-one is being forced into this.
You don't think MS will get some cut of any product this startup makes?
Yes, if the terms of the agreement stipulate that. So what? That's what licencing means. You either pay an up-front fee, or a per-unit/time fee, or a mixture of both. So what? Don't like it, don't do it, come up with your own ideas.
Then MS will either sue the startup out of business or buy them out.
Sue them for using stuff they're allowed to use? Do you have any idea how paranoid you sound? Unless they break the terms of their agreement, that'll never make it through a court. If they do break the terms of the agreement, what's the problem? If the agreement was bad, they shouldn't have agreed to it!
Can you point to even a single instance of a company entering into an agreement with MS, keeping to the terms of that agreement, and being *successsfully* sued by MS for breach of the agreement?
But this is slashdot, where things like that are easily countered with "so where are the Apache exploits?!" without thought to other reasons why there are so few...
Now days most processor review sites are hardly even concerned with the clock speed of the CPU.
To be fair, Intel has also dropped the GHz naming convention, and uses model numbers instead that indicate family, features, etc. (Of course, AMD dropped the MHz naming convention a long time ago...)
Almost none of those things that you mention are actually doing anything 99% of the time. AV, the notifiers, IM, auto-update, etc are all IO bound, so that second processor won't make a difference. Even when they do hit the processor, it's for a few microseconds at a time.
I had a Cyrix (PR-133 iirc), and I completely agree with you. For example, Unreal wouldn't even *install* on my machine, it just flat-out refused because of the Cyrix chip (no support for MMX)
I've no idea. I first saw the term used on kuro5hin, and a few people objected there too. I never got much more out of them than that it's derogatory - never *why* it is, just a blank assertion that it is.
Then it is a misconception on their part. Like GP said, it is an accepted terminology used globally.
Things change; once upon a time, "nigger" was an accepted word used globally. Now I'm not saying that this use of the word "American" is in any way similar to use of the word "nigger", just pointing out that words can and do change. It's been a long, long time since the word "Limey" was in common usage, for instance.
If it is not meant to be taken diparagingly, there is a hell of a coincidence between the non-word being used and the usual accompanying flamebait context.
No, it is *not* meant to be taken disparagingly. As others have said, given that the continent of "The Americas" encompasses many nations other than the US, it is felt in some circles that "American" is far too general a term for citizens of The United States of America, hence "USian" was born. Some of us also use "EUian" for European, "UKian" for us Brits, etc.
More so than the patent having been filed? I suppose you can argue that a slashdot reader would be more likely to have read the article (and potentially subpoena server logs,if they're kept for long enough), but without the logs it'd be hard to prove thay any given reader read it.
It is 100% FUD to pretend that code become tainted because you looked a GPL source.
You know, every time MS's Share Soruce initiative is mentioned here, someone (usually a number of people) pipe up saying that anyone who looks at the source is a fool, as they can never again work on a related FOSS project; seeing MS's source will have tainted them.
Which is it slashdot? If that's true for MS's source, it's true for any source.
The vetting process isn't just expensive, it's time consuming too. I don't know about the States, but here in the UK getting security cleared (to "normal" level, I forget the correct term) takes about 3 months. That's not 3 months of filling in forms, of course, but it is three months during which the person can't work on the project while you wait.
Take it from someone with a UID one tenth yours - low UIDs are meaningless. For some people, they have a certain feel-good, stand out from the crowd factor, but honestly until I clicked to read the replies and saw the post you're replying to, I hadn't even noticed mfh's UID.
Slashdot Mirror
I think you'd better shut the fuck up, moron, before you start claiming that you have the right not to have photons enter your property.
Actually, if you have an excessively bright light on too late at night, you'll likely end up in trouble for that, too.
I don't think anyone is trying to claim that they have a right to absolute silence. However, legally speaking we do have the right not to be subjected to noise (or light) at too high a level. It would be far preferable if people were considerate enough to not make it a problem in the first place, of course, but unfortunately that's not always the case.
How thick do these walls have to be? Because I've certainly heard other people's music through mine late at night in the past.
I don't care what you do out of sight or earshot of me; I only potentially have a problem with it if I can see or hear it. You have no right to impose your choice of music on those around you.
I ended up having to buy a separate sound card (Audigy 2) to replace the onboard sound support for my girlfriend's PC, as it became all but unusable. Running anything even slightly intensive caused massive sound drop outs and distortions. For instance, the sound for the "splash movie" in Sims 2 was screwed, as was in-game sound.
As opposed to the non-GC way, where you can destroy an object at any time, free its memory, and then segfault when you try to dereference a pointer that still existed elsewhere in the code. (Or try to free() it twice, and bomb out that way)
Overall, I prefer working in a garbage collected environment. You're right in that having a garbage collector in no way prevents memory leaks though. It means that you can't forget to call free(), but it doesn't guarantee to free the RAM. In fact, any given object may *never* be garbage collected, if the RAM is never needed (depending on the implementation of the garbage collector, VM parameters, etc)
It's not just that - even things like it being based on the Doom 3 engine rather than the Quake 3 one *may* be NDAd (yes, that was in the article, but it's an example of something that could be under an NDA)
I've worked on projects before where even the *existence* of the project was under NDA - I literally can't tell you what the project was about. (At the other extreme of course, there are open source projects.)
I don't know exactly where NDA boundaries lie
Well, your friend had better hope that they lie the other side of whatever he's told you. Assuming that they do, you can tell us everything you know. Assuming that they don't, you probably shouldn't have said this much...
All of that is true, but sometimes the people at the top really *are* just that bad too.
I'm with Orange in the UK, and for £22.5 a month I get about 200 any time, any network voice minutes and (thanks to a special offer when I signed up) 500 text messages included.
What right is being violated or threatened here? The servers belong to HP, the way I see it they have the right to delete anything they want. It might not be nice, but that's an entirely different matter.
Slashdot editors, can you at least *try* to keep the section on topic please?
Simple reply: tough. GET requests must be idempotent, they should not change state and absolutely must not change state destructively. You should be able to make the same GET request multiple times without affecting anything.
This is because with a POST request, if you hit refresh, the browser warns you that you're about to submit information, and that there may be undesirable consequences - Firefox explicitly mentions resubmitting an order for example. With a GET request there is no such warning. What if someone accidentally bookmarks the result of a GET that deletes some data, or similar? They may not even realise the damage they're causing while they empty the database.
As for extra effort, I really don't see it I'm afraid. I've been working on web-based applications for 6 years, and of all the things that have caused me pain, POST vs GET simply isn't one of them; it's a non-issue, once you understand when it is appropriate to use GET and when you should use POST.
It can't ignore the hosts file, that's an OS-level thing. It may in a sense bypass the hosts file, by retrieving a cached version of the page that contains the advert that would normally be blocked, but it's not ignoring the hosts file as such.
Actually, there's almost certainly nothing it can do about this, unless the cache is set to only cache HTML and images originating from the original server, forcing the browser to re-request items from other servers. That would somewhat diminish the point of the cache, though, and may be difficult to implement (I've not thought it through properly, and I really ought to be getting to bed)
Y'know, just saying "intellectual property" would have sufficed. Putting quotes around the words individually makes it look as though you're questioning the words individually, rather than as a phrase, which is not what you meant.
To answer your question, no, they will not. They are a company, and so exist to make money. IP helps companies such as MS make money, therefore they - naturally - have a particular view on it, and will want to make that view known.
Sexual preference, on the other hand, has absolutely nothing to do with them. It's good that they're taking a positive stance, but it's hardly important to their bottom line. From that point of view, there's no need for them to concern themselves with such debates, hence they won't.
Someone is always going to get screwed over, but it isn't the start ups or MS.
Then who is it? MS and the start-ups win, the venture capitalists will make sure they get their money, the public have another shiny toy available to buy if they wish, the economy is improved by some small amount - who loses?
MS wants these startup to use MS-only tech and be locked in.
And if they *are* "just a MS Word doc", what are they going to be locked-in to? A licencing deal? Big deal - that happens all the time, and no-one is being forced into this.
You don't think MS will get some cut of any product this startup makes?
Yes, if the terms of the agreement stipulate that. So what? That's what licencing means. You either pay an up-front fee, or a per-unit/time fee, or a mixture of both. So what? Don't like it, don't do it, come up with your own ideas.
Then MS will either sue the startup out of business or buy them out.
Sue them for using stuff they're allowed to use? Do you have any idea how paranoid you sound? Unless they break the terms of their agreement, that'll never make it through a court. If they do break the terms of the agreement, what's the problem? If the agreement was bad, they shouldn't have agreed to it!
Can you point to even a single instance of a company entering into an agreement with MS, keeping to the terms of that agreement, and being *successsfully* sued by MS for breach of the agreement?
But this is slashdot, where things like that are easily countered with "so where are the Apache exploits?!" without thought to other reasons why there are so few...
Now days most processor review sites are hardly even concerned with the clock speed of the CPU.
To be fair, Intel has also dropped the GHz naming convention, and uses model numbers instead that indicate family, features, etc. (Of course, AMD dropped the MHz naming convention a long time ago...)
Almost none of those things that you mention are actually doing anything 99% of the time. AV, the notifiers, IM, auto-update, etc are all IO bound, so that second processor won't make a difference. Even when they do hit the processor, it's for a few microseconds at a time.
I had a Cyrix (PR-133 iirc), and I completely agree with you. For example, Unreal wouldn't even *install* on my machine, it just flat-out refused because of the Cyrix chip (no support for MMX)
I've no idea. I first saw the term used on kuro5hin, and a few people objected there too. I never got much more out of them than that it's derogatory - never *why* it is, just a blank assertion that it is.
Then it is a misconception on their part. Like GP said, it is an accepted terminology used globally.
Things change; once upon a time, "nigger" was an accepted word used globally. Now I'm not saying that this use of the word "American" is in any way similar to use of the word "nigger", just pointing out that words can and do change. It's been a long, long time since the word "Limey" was in common usage, for instance.
If it is not meant to be taken diparagingly, there is a hell of a coincidence between the non-word being used and the usual accompanying flamebait context.
No, it is *not* meant to be taken disparagingly. As others have said, given that the continent of "The Americas" encompasses many nations other than the US, it is felt in some circles that "American" is far too general a term for citizens of The United States of America, hence "USian" was born. Some of us also use "EUian" for European, "UKian" for us Brits, etc.
More so than the patent having been filed? I suppose you can argue that a slashdot reader would be more likely to have read the article (and potentially subpoena server logs,if they're kept for long enough), but without the logs it'd be hard to prove thay any given reader read it.
It is 100% FUD to pretend that code become tainted because you looked a GPL source.
You know, every time MS's Share Soruce initiative is mentioned here, someone (usually a number of people) pipe up saying that anyone who looks at the source is a fool, as they can never again work on a related FOSS project; seeing MS's source will have tainted them.
Which is it slashdot? If that's true for MS's source, it's true for any source.
Because work performed for and by the government of any country should be to the benefit of all its citizens and businesses, that's why.
Love them of loathe them, MS generates a huge amount of money. That can only be good for the economy, and so for the country as a whole.
The vetting process isn't just expensive, it's time consuming too. I don't know about the States, but here in the UK getting security cleared (to "normal" level, I forget the correct term) takes about 3 months. That's not 3 months of filling in forms, of course, but it is three months during which the person can't work on the project while you wait.
Take it from someone with a UID one tenth yours - low UIDs are meaningless. For some people, they have a certain feel-good, stand out from the crowd factor, but honestly until I clicked to read the replies and saw the post you're replying to, I hadn't even noticed mfh's UID.