Of course, they can't ban cofee.. can they?
In many sports, there are strict limits for caffeine. It's possible to get busted in tests just by drinking too much coffee. Usually 300-500mg of caffeine pushes you above the limit (12mg of caffeine in 1l of urine). Since there is usually 40-60mg of caffeine in one cup of coffee, 10 cups of coffee would be too much.
(I think I'm quite extreme case too)
I have to take this one back. As I have read more, my situation is not all that bad. But, I've become quite confident that I really suffer from CAPD, especially after I read http://www.iser.com/caparticle.html. Maybe I really should consider specialized testing to try to identify my problem. Probably not, since I have learned to recognize my problems and live with them - being 100% sure would not add much to my life.
You sound just like one of my friends. Do I know you irl?
The observation that if you are lost in thought, that you cannot hear others, is unique to you only in that you are noticing it. But everybody is like that.
Either you didn't get my point, or I don't understand you.
I'm very well aware that people are lost in thought at times. Sometimes missing the phone ringing nearby. What I was trying to tell you about was speech becoming meaningless mumble whenever I'm distracted by anything else. I am not trying to make myself something special or very different from other people. I was just happy to know that there are people who's problems with handling audio input go to the same level with myself.
I understand your point about some being better at observing certaing things than others. But I think you are talking about different thing.
I suffer from all the same symptoms (I think I'm quite extreme case too), but I never had a name for it before. When someone starts talking to me, I'm remotely aware about it (sometimes not even that). Then I have to completely drop whatever I'm doing and ask them to repeat. It's quite annoying at times as other people get angry because they think I'm ignoring them. I also might miss parts of or whole sentences while trying to figure out what to say next. Actually I can't look people into eyes (or at their faces actually) during conversation, because that makes me think something irrelevant and lose part of the conversation.
Most of the time this, however, is a real blessing. I'm very good at concentrating in whatever I'm doing at the moment. And I'm still able to do several things at a time, as long as one of them doesn't include listening to any noise.
If someone would give you 'company secrets' he got by breaking into an office, do you think you could keep them (or send them away)? I don't know much about the laws around the world, but I'm sure that in every civilized nation, there's a law against possession of and/or delivering stolen property.
I also don't want to pile more money into middlemen who don't deserve any of it!
I'm sorry to say this, but yes, they do deserve some of it. They are taking huge financial risks in advertising, especially when the artist is unknown (i.e. when he really needs it). They also arrange opportunities for artists to get some name for him/herself (for example of letting them play in a concert of some, already famous band). Of course they do this because they expect to get some money from it.
Yes, and the version of Photoshop that I use is Mac-based, as opposed to Windows-based.
Sorry, I understood the article wrong. I really thought the downloadable software was a modified source of Linux.
The license agreement says:
1.1 SOFTWARE shall mean the computer program in binary form, and any associated information, that you are about to download.
CmdrTaco writes:
I was having a look at ThinkGeek's 6 Gb MP3 jukebox, and was interested to see that the software is Linux-based.
2. Move somewhere better. Good luck finding a place with as much oppertunity for success and freedom.
You are kidding, right? I don't know what you think as an opportunity for success (what is success anyway), but from what I have seen, freedom in USA is a big joke. Now, don't get me wrong, things are a lot worse in many 3rd world countries, but you can't seriously say that you can't find a country in Europe where citizens have more freedom than in USA.
I don't think that's the right question. Better one might be: "Would you like to keep using linux and still develop programs for windows (as it still is much more popular OS)" My point is that even if you don't want to run windos-apps. There are much more of those who do.
As I see the situation, this doesn't "reduce the incentive for companies to write good code that can be easily ported". Being able to run windows apps on linux reduces the need to have dual-boot (and windows-) boxes. This increases the number of linux-only users and therefore causes linux to reach position to demand native applications (we are not there yet).
It's the old developement speed vs. runtime speed -problem. Bying better hardware is cheap way to get your programs to run faster, so there's not much point in using C unless the runtime-speed difference is really big.
Source code copyright (and control of the source) remains with the author, regardless of which compiler he/she uses.
True, but this isn't about a compiler.This is about the c++builder, which is a RAD-tool and it generates many lines of code for you. It is possible that someone just fucked up writing that licence, right now it doesn't say a word about the source, only about distributing the program in executable form. (My english isn't best possible, but... ) That part maybe could be understood in a sense that it also allows the exec-only distributing. But that would still mean a mistake in writing the licence, at least I think that licences should be made so that there is only one way to understand them.
Yes it does, as you click'n drag components to your form, it generates the code that actually implements them. They may try to claim the right for that generated code, but I don't think it'll be possible. I think that this is kind of like maker of synthesizer would try to claim a song because the song uses something generated by the syntesizer.
You may reproduce and distribute, in executable form only, programs which you create... Somehow I just don't believe they can disallow distributing the source. I don't think this is legal and even if it was, how are they going to prove that the source was made using their tools. Of course the c++builder creates some config files that they maybe can have control over. (please forgive my bad english)
You have to spend time teaching the computer your voice and accent. If you voice ever changes, like you go through puberty or get a cold, then it won't recognize your voice any more.
I'm actually very suprised by this. Is it really so? I mean, voice recognition was at this level years ago. Hasn't there been any development, like computer being able to recognize you even if you have cold?
I would love to see intelligent spam filter, for mail and browsing. For browser, it would be a program that would filter unwanted banners (and other ads) by content, and not necessarily by address. I think that the mail part would be a lot easier, but I'm sure it would be very challenging.
Stealing sure is wrong, but I think this actually is a very good idea. Why don't the cable companies offer this. Or is anyone already selling tv-shows on the net.
>If they have many developers, why not use some of >those resources to get the most important part of >the project working (hint: send and receive >emails).
Sorry, I should have tried to explain myself better. What I meant was, there is an amount of developers you can assign to task to speed it up and anything beyond that will slow it down.
>Then again, maybe evoultion is not about emails, >maybe it's about everything else.
I understand that you would put a higher priority on the email-part, but people want to do different things. I would assume that they don't have that many developers interested in email -part.
Slashdot Mirror
Of course, they can't ban cofee.. can they?
In many sports, there are strict limits for caffeine. It's possible to get busted in tests just by drinking too much coffee. Usually 300-500mg of caffeine pushes you above the limit (12mg of caffeine in 1l of urine). Since there is usually 40-60mg of caffeine in one cup of coffee, 10 cups of coffee would be too much.
(I think I'm quite extreme case too)
I have to take this one back. As I have read more, my situation is not all that bad. But, I've become quite confident that I really suffer from CAPD, especially after I read http://www.iser.com/caparticle.html. Maybe I really should consider specialized testing to try to identify my problem. Probably not, since I have learned to recognize my problems and live with them - being 100% sure would not add much to my life.
Either you didn't get my point, or I don't understand you.
I'm very well aware that people are lost in thought at times. Sometimes missing the phone ringing nearby. What I was trying to tell you about was speech becoming meaningless mumble whenever I'm distracted by anything else. I am not trying to make myself something special or very different from other people. I was just happy to know that there are people who's problems with handling audio input go to the same level with myself.
I understand your point about some being better at observing certaing things than others. But I think you are talking about different thing.
What can I say....
well... Thank you!
I suffer from all the same symptoms (I think I'm quite extreme case too), but I never had a name for it before. When someone starts talking to me, I'm remotely aware about it (sometimes not even that). Then I have to completely drop whatever I'm doing and ask them to repeat. It's quite annoying at times as other people get angry because they think I'm ignoring them. I also might miss parts of or whole sentences while trying to figure out what to say next. Actually I can't look people into eyes (or at their faces actually) during conversation, because that makes me think something irrelevant and lose part of the conversation.
Most of the time this, however, is a real blessing. I'm very good at concentrating in whatever I'm doing at the moment. And I'm still able to do several things at a time, as long as one of them doesn't include listening to any noise.
If someone would give you 'company secrets' he got by breaking into an office, do you think you could keep them (or send them away)? I don't know much about the laws around the world, but I'm sure that in every civilized nation, there's a law against possession of and/or delivering stolen property.
I'm sorry to say this, but yes, they do deserve some of it. They are taking huge financial risks in advertising, especially when the artist is unknown (i.e. when he really needs it). They also arrange opportunities for artists to get some name for him/herself (for example of letting them play in a concert of some, already famous band). Of course they do this because they expect to get some money from it.
Yes, and the version of Photoshop that I use is Mac-based, as opposed to Windows-based.
Sorry, I understood the article wrong. I really thought the downloadable software was a modified source of Linux.
The license agreement says:
1.1 SOFTWARE shall mean the computer program in binary form, and any associated information, that you are about to download.
CmdrTaco writes:
I was having a look at ThinkGeek's 6 Gb MP3 jukebox, and was interested to see that the software is Linux-based.
And for your question: Yes. Linux is GPL.
You are kidding, right? I don't know what you think as an opportunity for success (what is success anyway), but from what I have seen, freedom in USA is a big joke. Now, don't get me wrong, things are a lot worse in many 3rd world countries, but you can't seriously say that you can't find a country in Europe where citizens have more freedom than in USA.
True, but what about those script kiddies that actually are on their machines? If cracker leaves the door open, should you hit back?
My point is that even if you don't want to run windos-apps. There are much more of those who do.
As I see the situation, this doesn't "reduce the incentive for companies to write good code that can be easily ported".
Being able to run windows apps on linux reduces the need to have dual-boot (and windows-) boxes. This increases the number of linux-only users and therefore causes linux to reach position to demand native applications (we are not there yet).
It's the old developement speed vs. runtime speed -problem. Bying better hardware is cheap way to get your programs to run faster, so there's not much point in using C unless the runtime-speed difference is really big.
I don't think that one can make decision on something he doesn't understand.
What the hell does porno have to do with being able to make good decision in court.
He bet it in a card game - and lost.
True, but this isn't about a compiler.This is about the c++builder, which is a RAD-tool and it generates many lines of code for you. It is possible that someone just fucked up writing that licence, right now it doesn't say a word about the source, only about distributing the program in executable form. (My english isn't best possible, but... ) That part maybe could be understood in a sense that it also allows the exec-only distributing. But that would still mean a mistake in writing the licence, at least I think that licences should be made so that there is only one way to understand them.
Yes it does, as you click'n drag components to your form, it generates the code that actually implements them. They may try to claim the right for that generated code, but I don't think it'll be possible. I think that this is kind of like maker of synthesizer would try to claim a song because the song uses something generated by the syntesizer.
(please excuse me my bad english)
You may reproduce and distribute, in executable form only, programs which you create...
Somehow I just don't believe they can disallow distributing the source. I don't think this is legal and even if it was, how are they going to prove that the source was made using their tools. Of course the c++builder creates some config files that they maybe can have control over.
(please forgive my bad english)
I'm actually very suprised by this. Is it really so? I mean, voice recognition was at this level years ago. Hasn't there been any development, like computer being able to recognize you even if you have cold?
Just in case anyone else was wondering, it can be downloaded here.
And here is a good "How to get started" -document.
I would love to see intelligent spam filter, for
mail and browsing.
For browser, it would be a program that
would filter unwanted banners (and other ads) by content, and not necessarily by address.
I think that the mail part would be a lot
easier, but I'm sure it would be very challenging.
(sorry about my english)
Stealing sure is wrong, but I think this actually is a very good idea. Why don't the cable companies offer this. Or is anyone already selling tv-shows on the net.
>If they have many developers, why not use some of
>those resources to get the most important part of
>the project working (hint: send and receive
>emails).
Sorry, I should have tried to explain myself
better. What I meant was, there is an amount
of developers you can assign to task to speed it
up and anything beyond that will slow it down.
>Then again, maybe evoultion is not about emails,
>maybe it's about everything else.
I understand that you would put a higher priority
on the email-part, but people want to do different
things. I would assume that they don't have that
many developers interested in email -part.
I feel that the right way to do things like this
would be to separate it to gui-frontend and
command-line/textmode -tools.