MSDN is more than just documentation. I spent yesterday sorting our MSDN subscription at work, so I can definitively say that it includes quite a bit of software too...
While you're correct that you won't get any special licenses to use MS formats through MSDN, and that most of the documentation is available through the MSDN website, an MSDN subscription includes licenses to basically every piece of software Microsoft is currently supporting.
But, yeah, MSDN won't give you the license to use Microsoft patented whatever on other operating systems. It will probably give you the information on how to access the various Microsoft APIs to handle the info, but that's it.
Last I checked, international policy was the domain of the Executive Branch. So they are well within their power to cancel participation in the ABM treaty and the Kyoto treaty.
So please be more specific about which laws they've "scuttled." I'm not really a Bush supporter, but with all the crap the Democrats have been doing to discredit him there's very little chance I'm going to be voting for a Democrat in the upcoming election. An "incompetent Republican" is far better than any of the current Democrat canidates.
The DMCA was sponsered by the Democratic Party. The DMCA was sponsered by the Democratic Party. The DMCA was sponsered by the Democratic Party.
Yes, the Bush administration is *gasp* doing it's job by enforcing the law of the land. The Executive Branch, remember that from school? It means that Bush is responsible for "executing" the laws of the land. He is not allowed to simply ignore a law.
Bush is doing his job. Nothing more, nothing less. If you have a problem with the DMCA, take it up with Congress. Bush has nothing to do with it, other than being the leader of the branch that is charged, through the Constitution of the United States of America, to enforce the laws that Congress passes.
So by attacking Bush based on the DMCA, you're suggesting that you are indeed a leftie-wacko. If you're not, then you need to understand that the DMCA is a Democratic Party invention, and was passed into law under the Clinton Administration. Enforcing the law then became the responsibility of whoever was in office, first Clinton, and now Bush. That's the way the nation works. Again, if you have an issue with the DMCA, take Congress to task. Bush can't do anything about it.
Costume Designer != Artist who drew concept picture
So, yes, it could well be the name of the costume designer, and these are concept pictures drawn by an artist based on what the costume designer has drawn.
Actually, Merriam-Webster does allow direct links. You can use it in the default Firebird keywords too, it's under the keyword "webster".
Or, for Mozilla users, "http://www.merriam-webster.com/cgi-bin/dictionary ?book=Dictionary&va=%s"
Although admitably they use POST by default. But the individual words linked from definition to definition give away the secret to directly linking to a given definition.:)
The ability to remote the display is a powerful thing that allows for many compute options not easily done with single-user framebuffer based systems.
It's nice, sure - but I'd like to see one more feature added that X seems to be missing. I think it's actually possible with addon-software, but I'd like to see it better supported: remote running apps to another X11 session.
Suppose I left Mozilla running on my desktop machine in my room. I'm out somewhere else with my laptop and want to resume reading whatever where I left off. I'd like to take the currently running Mozilla and remote it from the desktop to my laptop. I currently cannot do that with X as it stands today. A much more realistic example is remoting a running GAIM.
Basically, I want "screen" for X11 but one where I can remote only one application at a time and not the entire desktop. X11 allows remote and local applications to share the same workspace, and being able to remote a running program off another computer would be very nice.
Do you have any proof of this? Any figures? I'm honestly curious about this, but I find it very hard to believe that Massachusetts doesn't get its fair share of the "pork."
Look over the web site. It's practically science fiction. It's a neat concept but I just can't see it actually succeeding, let alone financed and built.
Although like an aircraft carrier, Freedom Ship (the name of the ship, if you didn't follow the link) does have the ability to have aircraft take off and land on it.
However, during the 50s, 60s, and 70s, Massachusetts didn't see any of that while most other states were able to receive the funds. All of the interstate highways built during that period were funded using Massachusetts money.
Can you link to any information about this? I went looking for info on why Massachusetts would have missed out on federal funds, but couldn't find any. I have a sneaking suspicion, though, that Massachusetts missed out on the funding because they wouldn't abide by the rules for getting that funding, and therefore lost out.
I'd also like to find statistics on how much various states are funded through these funds and how much Massachusetts is receiving over it's fair share, but I couldn't find any data on that either.
I've seen that show before. I remember that on most of the episodes they show, the projects were interesting, but totally impractical to actually build. Things like building a bridge across the Bering Straight, to building a sky-scraper that was practically an arcology from SimCity. One of the most insane ones involved building a large boat that would basically be a floating city.
None of these projects were actually built, and for most of them, there were no current plans to actually start construction.
Then I see the show on the Big Dig, and I begin to realize...
I think it was a point that the costs were just insane. I get as much benefit from the $16 billion my home state just spent as I would if they had purchased a sub, bomber, and aircraft carrier: none. Actually, I get more benefit from the latter group - they can at least help defend the nation, where as the Big Dig helps people who work in Boston.
I think that was the point - to put the costs in scale.
Considering how it's currently set up, that's not far off. The lanes have been rerouted so many times that as I was driving home tonight from Burlington there were times I couldn't tell which white lines were the "real" white lines because so many had been drawn and then "erased" with black paint that has since been worn off, reexposing the original lane.
Route 3 sucks right now. (Especially Drum Hill, where they "fixed" a rotery by adding in five (or more?) stop lights. When you have a sign that has five lanes that are in three groups to explain how to navigate it, it isn't "better"...)
Not this crap again! *sigh* You see, like any supply contract, there are overhead costs. However, due to the way purchasing works, the supply costs are averaged out over all the items being purchased. Therefore, the individual line item for "hammer" will include the various costs (some including R&D costs) of every item on the list.
(Plus regulations designed to protect against the "$50 hammer" have wound up causing even more expenses in handling these contracts, so now the government pays even more to ensure they aren't overpaying.)
Even if $50 is overcharged, it probably is at worst triple the cost. (And most likely not even that.) The Big Dig is what, over six times the original cost? As a Massachusetts citizen, this does nothing for me because I have the misfortune in living in the other 90% of the state. Fortunately, my local school system is laying off teachers because no one will fund them anymore due to the huge cost of subsidizing various construction projects like the Big Dig and the crap they're pulling on Route 3. Yeah, I'm thrilled.
Here's a question for you: Are there any Qt bindings available for PHP?
One of the impressions I've gotten between the two environments is that GTK+ being written in C means that it's easier to write language bindings for it in other languages. You don't need to worry about name mangling and the like, for the most part. Various other enivornments can more easily map directly to it since C dynamic libraries are better-defined than C++ created dynamic libraries.
I'm not sure if this is still true, I found Qt bindings for Perl and Python in a quick Google search. But I'm not sure how mature they are. I know that three years ago when I wanted to write a GUI Perl app, I wound up using GTK+ bindings for Perl and that from what I've heard the various Mandrake tools are written for GTK+ because the Perl bindings were available and not the Qt bindings.
Doesn't really matter to me, since I do mostly Java work under Windows. Although from briefly using the GTK+ toolkit, I can say without a doubt that it is one of the worst APIs I have ever touched. (Although I'm still debating about whether the Windows GUI API is worse. It's a toss-up.) The Perl bindings made it slightly easier to use, but trying to use it in C was just God-awful. I kind of hope it has changed since then. (Also didn't help that there was no documentation.)
I just tested this. You can't do this in a Slashdot link anyway, but you don't need JavaScript to exploit the bug - plain old HTML will do, as long as you find an editor that allows you to enter non-character bytes.
However, as a protection from slashdot.org@goatse.cx links, Slashdot removes the text before the "@" symbol in HTTP links so I can't post a demo-link in a post. (Unless someone has an exploit for that feature...:))
Lost interest in that worthless show when then converted a Mustang into a lawnmower.
I thought I remembered hearing that the lawnermower episode was the pilot. I was wrong. It's the forth episode. (Although I believe that car was the first "idea" the producers came up with.)
I gave up interest in the show when it became crystal clear that the first rule ("When completed, the monster machine must appear to be stock.") was completely and totally ignored. In fact, none of the rules seem to actually apply. The only rule for winning is that the completed car must do whatever was chosen for that episode.
I no longer watch the Discovery Channel. There's nothing good on anymore. (Same with TLC, but that happened earlier.) I'm left with the History Channel for TV entertainment. I wonder why I'm playing more video games now...
Yet again, Mozilla won't let me preview (the HTML is there, I can View Source, but Mozilla won't display it). I'm going to have to switch back to IE until this is fixed... *sigh* Please forgive any errors that should have been fixed on preview!
Worked for me. I tried "slashdot.org" and "www.theregister.co.uk" - both of them worked just fine. However, "www.isthatdamngood.com" did indeed cause a scripting error - but I doubt it would effect their actual surveying, it's just an ASP error, not an actual "crash."
Anyway, it's long been known that Netcraft's methods are flawed, since it counts individual web servers multiple times for each virtual domain. It should only count unique sites. (For example, Slashdot counts for something like 13 sites - the individual sections (like apple.slashdot.org - I'm not listing all of them), slashdot.org, www.slashdot.org, images.slashdot.org.)
It's still debatable what the correct survey method is (and whether Port80's method is any better), but Netcraft is biased towards sites with lots of virtual domain names. (I'd imagine SourceForge gets counted many times, too...) Of course, it's also questionable if individual servers in a round-robin load-balancing solution should be counted, so counting by IP instead of domain name is questionable too.
As is often said, "there are lies, damned lies, and statistics" - any counting method has issues.
Blah, I can't preview because Mozilla is f***ing broken and won't display the preview page, so please pardon any typos.
Metered wireless internet access? What's that? I finally can lord something that my US Cellphone does better than European ones! Since no one over here uses their phones for Internet Access, the Sprint plan I got has unlimited internet access through the phone for just $10/month.
Although I just checked my plan and it turns out that they cancel your plan if you actually use it for Internet access. Fooey. (It also says I can't run servers on the phone itself. So much for my Apache midlet, I guess.)
Young enough that it couldn't have been him - I'm a child of the 80s. The early 80s, but still there's that year or so that keeps him out of contention:)
Slashdot Mirror
While you're correct that you won't get any special licenses to use MS formats through MSDN, and that most of the documentation is available through the MSDN website, an MSDN subscription includes licenses to basically every piece of software Microsoft is currently supporting.
But, yeah, MSDN won't give you the license to use Microsoft patented whatever on other operating systems. It will probably give you the information on how to access the various Microsoft APIs to handle the info, but that's it.
I've said it before, I'll say it again: Politicians cannot be trusted.
I fixed your statement. If you don't believe the Democrats would be doing this, or aren't doing it themselves, then you're naive.
So please be more specific about which laws they've "scuttled." I'm not really a Bush supporter, but with all the crap the Democrats have been doing to discredit him there's very little chance I'm going to be voting for a Democrat in the upcoming election. An "incompetent Republican" is far better than any of the current Democrat canidates.
The DMCA was sponsered by the Democratic Party. The DMCA was sponsered by the Democratic Party. The DMCA was sponsered by the Democratic Party.
Yes, the Bush administration is *gasp* doing it's job by enforcing the law of the land. The Executive Branch, remember that from school? It means that Bush is responsible for "executing" the laws of the land. He is not allowed to simply ignore a law.
Bush is doing his job. Nothing more, nothing less. If you have a problem with the DMCA, take it up with Congress. Bush has nothing to do with it, other than being the leader of the branch that is charged, through the Constitution of the United States of America, to enforce the laws that Congress passes.
So by attacking Bush based on the DMCA, you're suggesting that you are indeed a leftie-wacko. If you're not, then you need to understand that the DMCA is a Democratic Party invention, and was passed into law under the Clinton Administration. Enforcing the law then became the responsibility of whoever was in office, first Clinton, and now Bush. That's the way the nation works. Again, if you have an issue with the DMCA, take Congress to task. Bush can't do anything about it.
So, yes, it could well be the name of the costume designer, and these are concept pictures drawn by an artist based on what the costume designer has drawn.
Or, for Mozilla users, "http://www.merriam-webster.com/cgi-bin/dictionary ?book=Dictionary&va=%s"
Although admitably they use POST by default. But the individual words linked from definition to definition give away the secret to directly linking to a given definition. :)
Apparently it has frozen over, but even if it hasn't, the article seems to suggest that Boston has. :)
Oh, come on, that's just good taste. :P
It's nice, sure - but I'd like to see one more feature added that X seems to be missing. I think it's actually possible with addon-software, but I'd like to see it better supported: remote running apps to another X11 session.
Suppose I left Mozilla running on my desktop machine in my room. I'm out somewhere else with my laptop and want to resume reading whatever where I left off. I'd like to take the currently running Mozilla and remote it from the desktop to my laptop. I currently cannot do that with X as it stands today. A much more realistic example is remoting a running GAIM.
Basically, I want "screen" for X11 but one where I can remote only one application at a time and not the entire desktop. X11 allows remote and local applications to share the same workspace, and being able to remote a running program off another computer would be very nice.
Do you have any proof of this? Any figures? I'm honestly curious about this, but I find it very hard to believe that Massachusetts doesn't get its fair share of the "pork."
Look over the web site. It's practically science fiction. It's a neat concept but I just can't see it actually succeeding, let alone financed and built.
Although like an aircraft carrier, Freedom Ship (the name of the ship, if you didn't follow the link) does have the ability to have aircraft take off and land on it.
Can you link to any information about this? I went looking for info on why Massachusetts would have missed out on federal funds, but couldn't find any. I have a sneaking suspicion, though, that Massachusetts missed out on the funding because they wouldn't abide by the rules for getting that funding, and therefore lost out.
I'd also like to find statistics on how much various states are funded through these funds and how much Massachusetts is receiving over it's fair share, but I couldn't find any data on that either.
None of these projects were actually built, and for most of them, there were no current plans to actually start construction.
Then I see the show on the Big Dig, and I begin to realize...
I think that was the point - to put the costs in scale.
Route 3 sucks right now. (Especially Drum Hill, where they "fixed" a rotery by adding in five (or more?) stop lights. When you have a sign that has five lanes that are in three groups to explain how to navigate it, it isn't "better"...)
Not this crap again! *sigh* You see, like any supply contract, there are overhead costs. However, due to the way purchasing works, the supply costs are averaged out over all the items being purchased. Therefore, the individual line item for "hammer" will include the various costs (some including R&D costs) of every item on the list.
(Plus regulations designed to protect against the "$50 hammer" have wound up causing even more expenses in handling these contracts, so now the government pays even more to ensure they aren't overpaying.)
Even if $50 is overcharged, it probably is at worst triple the cost. (And most likely not even that.) The Big Dig is what, over six times the original cost? As a Massachusetts citizen, this does nothing for me because I have the misfortune in living in the other 90% of the state. Fortunately, my local school system is laying off teachers because no one will fund them anymore due to the huge cost of subsidizing various construction projects like the Big Dig and the crap they're pulling on Route 3. Yeah, I'm thrilled.
One of the impressions I've gotten between the two environments is that GTK+ being written in C means that it's easier to write language bindings for it in other languages. You don't need to worry about name mangling and the like, for the most part. Various other enivornments can more easily map directly to it since C dynamic libraries are better-defined than C++ created dynamic libraries.
I'm not sure if this is still true, I found Qt bindings for Perl and Python in a quick Google search. But I'm not sure how mature they are. I know that three years ago when I wanted to write a GUI Perl app, I wound up using GTK+ bindings for Perl and that from what I've heard the various Mandrake tools are written for GTK+ because the Perl bindings were available and not the Qt bindings.
Doesn't really matter to me, since I do mostly Java work under Windows. Although from briefly using the GTK+ toolkit, I can say without a doubt that it is one of the worst APIs I have ever touched. (Although I'm still debating about whether the Windows GUI API is worse. It's a toss-up.) The Perl bindings made it slightly easier to use, but trying to use it in C was just God-awful. I kind of hope it has changed since then. (Also didn't help that there was no documentation.)
He started to glow white as he defeated Smith. The group I was with considered it to be close enough...
However, as a protection from slashdot.org@goatse.cx links, Slashdot removes the text before the "@" symbol in HTTP links so I can't post a demo-link in a post. (Unless someone has an exploit for that feature... :))
And being from New England, the next person I hear say "y'all" is going to get... well, something bad.:)
I thought I remembered hearing that the lawnermower episode was the pilot. I was wrong. It's the forth episode. (Although I believe that car was the first "idea" the producers came up with.)
I gave up interest in the show when it became crystal clear that the first rule ("When completed, the monster machine must appear to be stock.") was completely and totally ignored. In fact, none of the rules seem to actually apply. The only rule for winning is that the completed car must do whatever was chosen for that episode.
I no longer watch the Discovery Channel. There's nothing good on anymore. (Same with TLC, but that happened earlier.) I'm left with the History Channel for TV entertainment. I wonder why I'm playing more video games now...
Yet again, Mozilla won't let me preview (the HTML is there, I can View Source, but Mozilla won't display it). I'm going to have to switch back to IE until this is fixed... *sigh* Please forgive any errors that should have been fixed on preview!
I was going to mention Fluxx too, (and it's Fluxx, not Flux, BTW) but I've got the link to the product to go with it :)
Anyway, it's long been known that Netcraft's methods are flawed, since it counts individual web servers multiple times for each virtual domain. It should only count unique sites. (For example, Slashdot counts for something like 13 sites - the individual sections (like apple.slashdot.org - I'm not listing all of them), slashdot.org, www.slashdot.org, images.slashdot.org.)
It's still debatable what the correct survey method is (and whether Port80's method is any better), but Netcraft is biased towards sites with lots of virtual domain names. (I'd imagine SourceForge gets counted many times, too...) Of course, it's also questionable if individual servers in a round-robin load-balancing solution should be counted, so counting by IP instead of domain name is questionable too.
As is often said, "there are lies, damned lies, and statistics" - any counting method has issues.
Blah, I can't preview because Mozilla is f***ing broken and won't display the preview page, so please pardon any typos.
Although I just checked my plan and it turns out that they cancel your plan if you actually use it for Internet access. Fooey. (It also says I can't run servers on the phone itself. So much for my Apache midlet, I guess.)
Young enough that it couldn't have been him - I'm a child of the 80s. The early 80s, but still there's that year or so that keeps him out of contention :)