...are prone to manipulation. WHen volume is high and there's a lot of activity and the bid/ask spread is narrow, there's not much luck of manipulating it short of throwing wads of cash at it. SOmeone on the Yahoo finance message board for SCO says that someone spent $1 million in 15 minutes to stop the free fall.
WHen the volume is low and the bid/ask spread is wide, someone can (illegally) collude with someone else to make wash trades within the bid/ask spread to slowly walk the price upward. The price is completely unsupported so that when selling hits again, it free falls as it did today.
You can learn a lot about the risks of trading thinly traded stocks by reading the last few weeks of messages on the Yahoo finance board.
You can't have voting receipts... because that would make it too easy to corrupt the voting process.
You mean like corporations buying candidates with contributions dosn't corrupt the voting process? Hey, let the little guy profit from the corporation's largess for once.
The heat of entry will burn up and melt Galileo and any bacteria which may have hitched a ride..
If you're really concerned, think about the plutonium we'll be dumping into Jupiter from the 'reactor' on board. Well, don't worry about that either because it will get dispersed over a huge volume.
Diets which you do for a short period of time to lose weight before reverting to your normal eating habits just do not work. The only way to permanently lose weight is to change your lifestyle permanently -- what you eat and how much exercise you do.
Though the number of H-1B visas is limited by law to 195,000 per year -- a number that will drop to 65,000 in 2004 -- amounting to just 0.13 percent of the total U.S. labor force, the programs have their greatest impact on high-tech jobs, which are among the best-paying in the economy.
...if a tree falls in the woods and no one is around to hear it, it dosn't make a sound since sound implies someone heard it.
I suppose it fillows that there is no such thing as ultrasound and the images I have of my daughter in utero were fradulent.
Sound is periodic vibrations due to compression waves in a medium. Within a certain range of frequencies, sound can be heard (if it is loud enough) outside of those frequencies, we still call it sound even if no one can hear it. That's what we're talking about here.
Now I *know* you're just yanking my chain. The lag of communicating from Earth makes controlling machinery which dosn't have a lot of local smarts completely impractical. Astronauts have enough trouble spending 6 months in micro-G protected from much radiation by the Van Allen belts. Six months in lunar orbit would expose anyone to more radiation than we've ever deliberately exposed anyone to.
I repeat my initial assertion. Your ideas are all pie-in-the-sky and have no grounding in practical reality.
I have no doubt it could be made to work given enough time and materials. But you've advocated not sending a module but having the colonists rely on unproven technology to provide their living space. That is just unsound engineering.
No, because whatever they've done, it's insufficient.
We learned at least one thing from Biodome and that is uncured concrete soaks up a whole lot of oxygen. What we don't know about lunar concrete and it's chemistry and its long term durability and how to work with it in low-G and hard vacuum is more than enough to give anyone pause.
It's the same old pie-in-the-sky story which ignores any of the real problems. Sure. There is water on the moon and Mars. We still don't know how difficult it will be to extract. No one has ever made "lunar concrete" so no one knows if it's reliable enough to build a habitat out of. And where will people live until they build their habitat? You rant at chemical propulsion, but it's the only way we have to get stuff off of the surface of the Earth. We've used other technologies in solar orbit but they can't push around the kind of masses we're talking about.
Your dream is a 1950s dream and we're not any closer to it now than we were 50 years ago. And that's my whole point.
My point is that things which looked possible in the 50s and 60s are looking much less possible today. The future *has* failed to live up to our dreams. Since most SF is an extrapolation of current and near future trends, and since it dosn't look like we'll be doing much space exploration other than looking through ever stronger telescopes, the SF reflects those near-term trends.
Let's ignore for a minute the prohibitive cost of actually moving material from the asteroid belt to the Earth. Do you actually think for a minute that anyone in their right mind is going to let people manipulate huge masses in the vicinity of the Earth? If someone fails to convert meters to miles and a probe strikes Mars instrad of going into orbit, no big whoop. But if someone screws up handling an asteroid and plops it in the middle of the Pacific Ocean instead, that's a very big deal. It is realities like this which make this kind of economic activity UNeconomic.
The old space operas posited FTL travel. It was assumed that you could get around your own solar system, but needed some FTL to get to the next one. Well, even the assumption of easy access to local space is proving wrong. It's difficult, expensive and risky to move mass from the surface of the Earth into near orbit and prohibitively expensive to move it further than that. A Mars expedition looks more and more infeasable and the old space themes of colonizing the moon or Mars or mining the asteriods are proving to be just so much wishful thinking.
You can use any one of the 255 192.168.x.0/16 networks or group them up into a 192.168.0.0/24 network. Or you could grab a/16 some where in 10.0 and subnet it to a smaller network.
Subnetting has been completely divorced from classes for about 10 years now.
Are we talking about fraud or insider trading? There is a safe harbor for insider trading in timed sales plans. I can't find the reference to the law right now, but it uses the phrase "safe harbor".
That dosn't mean that the company's actions might not independantly amount to fraud, but that's a harder case to make.
There's a big loophole in the insider trading laws and the SCO execs are taking advantage of it. There is a safe harbor if you have a plan to sell shares at predetermined points in time over a long enough period. The SCO execs have such a plan filed back in January at the same time that the lawsuit grumblings began to be heard.
Look for another press release to boost the stock price next Monday, September 8, when some of the top execs will be selling again.
Basically, the CA Supreme Court said that the Court of Appeals should have considered whether the basis for granting the original injunction was sound. The Court of Appeals said, even assuming it's sound, it's a prior restraint under the First Amendment.
This is still bad news for the DVDCCA becuase their trade secret is no more. In the dissent, one CA Justice was ready to declare it then and there. The majority of justices thought it better to let the Court of Appeals make that determination. It is appealable again after that.
The opinion says that this is a narrow decision. All it says is that there are some circumstances when the courts can order non-disclosure against some individuals.
The problem is that SCO itself distributed the code under the GPL. IBM's claim is that they can't claim it was done without their knowledge because they distributed it themselves. If they are going to distribute, then they have an obligation to their shareholders to make sure that they aren't distributing something which violates their own rights. SCO employees actively participated in kernel development and the development is completely open so that SCO can see what's going into it. When they are so deeply involved in developing Linux themselves, the claim that any distribution was inadvertant becomes less and less plausible.
All it takes is for one home user using VPN or a single laptop user to get infected and then connect to the corporate network to spread it befind the firewall. Blocking port 135 at the firewall is SOP almost everywhere.
Behind the firewall, port 135 is necessary in Windows networks and can't be blocked without massive breakage.
Installing a single copy of a computer program which the user "owns" is not an infringement of Copyright. That's in section 109.
Now, it's hard to say when one "owns" a copy of an infringing work. It appears to me that if you purchase media from a Linux distributor and install it on one OC, you have not infringed.
If you do multiple installs from one piece of media or duplicate that media or patch the kernel (to make a derivative work) or even compile your own kernel, you may have infringed *IF* the SCO Copyright claims have any merit.
Interesting point of view on Copyright by the lawyers. Of course, a legal opinion is just an opinion unless someone can point to law or precedent which clearly establishes the point.
If you run a message board, you have a collective copyright on the entire collaboration (the same way a publisher of a magazine can have a copyright on an issue while the article authors may retain copyright on their individual articles), but it's very unclear that you have a copyright on each individual post absent an assignment or a work for hire situation.
AT&T released several versions of Unix. System V was one susch version which went through several releases, the last of which was System V, Release 4 or SVR4 in 1988. See for a chart.
Sys V refers to the Unix source code as it stood in the mid 80s.
Slashdot Mirror
...are prone to manipulation. WHen volume is high and there's a lot of activity and the bid/ask spread is narrow, there's not much luck of manipulating it short of throwing wads of cash at it. SOmeone on the Yahoo finance message board for SCO says that someone spent $1 million in 15 minutes to stop the free fall.
WHen the volume is low and the bid/ask spread is wide, someone can (illegally) collude with someone else to make wash trades within the bid/ask spread to slowly walk the price upward. The price is completely unsupported so that when selling hits again, it free falls as it did today.
You can learn a lot about the risks of trading thinly traded stocks by reading the last few weeks of messages on the Yahoo finance board.
You can't have voting receipts... because that would make it too easy to corrupt the voting process.
You mean like corporations buying candidates with contributions dosn't corrupt the voting process? Hey, let the little guy profit from the corporation's largess for once.
The heat of entry will burn up and melt Galileo and any bacteria which may have hitched a ride..
If you're really concerned, think about the plutonium we'll be dumping into Jupiter from the 'reactor' on board. Well, don't worry about that either because it will get dispersed over a huge volume.
Diets which you do for a short period of time to lose weight before reverting to your normal eating habits just do not work. The only way to permanently lose weight is to change your lifestyle permanently -- what you eat and how much exercise you do.
Americans can't move overseas and take jobs away from locals? What is this world coming to?
I mean we let people from all over come here and work. Ummmmm, except we don't.
You can get a tourist visa to visit most any place in the world. I went to China earlier this year. But those visas don't allow you to work.
Why is this even a story? It's the way things are.
...if a tree falls in the woods and no one is around to hear it, it dosn't make a sound since sound implies someone heard it.
I suppose it fillows that there is no such thing as ultrasound and the images I have of my daughter in utero were fradulent.
Sound is periodic vibrations due to compression waves in a medium. Within a certain range of frequencies, sound can be heard (if it is loud enough) outside of those frequencies, we still call it sound even if no one can hear it. That's what we're talking about here.
Now I *know* you're just yanking my chain. The lag of communicating from Earth makes controlling machinery which dosn't have a lot of local smarts completely impractical. Astronauts have enough trouble spending 6 months in micro-G protected from much radiation by the Van Allen belts. Six months in lunar orbit would expose anyone to more radiation than we've ever deliberately exposed anyone to.
I repeat my initial assertion. Your ideas are all pie-in-the-sky and have no grounding in practical reality.
I have no doubt it could be made to work given enough time and materials. But you've advocated not sending a module but having the colonists rely on unproven technology to provide their living space. That is just unsound engineering.
No, because whatever they've done, it's insufficient.
We learned at least one thing from Biodome and that is uncured concrete soaks up a whole lot of oxygen. What we don't know about lunar concrete and it's chemistry and its long term durability and how to work with it in low-G and hard vacuum is more than enough to give anyone pause.
LOL!
It's the same old pie-in-the-sky story which ignores any of the real problems. Sure. There is water on the moon and Mars. We still don't know how difficult it will be to extract. No one has ever made "lunar concrete" so no one knows if it's reliable enough to build a habitat out of. And where will people live until they build their habitat? You rant at chemical propulsion, but it's the only way we have to get stuff off of the surface of the Earth. We've used other technologies in solar orbit but they can't push around the kind of masses we're talking about.
Your dream is a 1950s dream and we're not any closer to it now than we were 50 years ago. And that's my whole point.
My point is that things which looked possible in the 50s and 60s are looking much less possible today. The future *has* failed to live up to our dreams. Since most SF is an extrapolation of current and near future trends, and since it dosn't look like we'll be doing much space exploration other than looking through ever stronger telescopes, the SF reflects those near-term trends.
Let's ignore for a minute the prohibitive cost of actually moving material from the asteroid belt to the Earth. Do you actually think for a minute that anyone in their right mind is going to let people manipulate huge masses in the vicinity of the Earth? If someone fails to convert meters to miles and a probe strikes Mars instrad of going into orbit, no big whoop. But if someone screws up handling an asteroid and plops it in the middle of the Pacific Ocean instead, that's a very big deal. It is realities like this which make this kind of economic activity UNeconomic.
The old space operas posited FTL travel. It was assumed that you could get around your own solar system, but needed some FTL to get to the next one. Well, even the assumption of easy access to local space is proving wrong. It's difficult, expensive and risky to move mass from the surface of the Earth into near orbit and prohibitively expensive to move it further than that. A Mars expedition looks more and more infeasable and the old space themes of colonizing the moon or Mars or mining the asteriods are proving to be just so much wishful thinking.
You can use any one of the 255 192.168.x.0/16 networks or group them up into a 192.168.0.0/24 network. Or you could grab a /16 some where in 10.0 and subnet it to a smaller network.
Subnetting has been completely divorced from classes for about 10 years now.
Are we talking about fraud or insider trading? There is a safe harbor for insider trading in timed sales plans. I can't find the reference to the law right now, but it uses the phrase "safe harbor".
That dosn't mean that the company's actions might not independantly amount to fraud, but that's a harder case to make.
There's a big loophole in the insider trading laws and the SCO execs are taking advantage of it. There is a safe harbor if you have a plan to sell shares at predetermined points in time over a long enough period. The SCO execs have such a plan filed back in January at the same time that the lawsuit grumblings began to be heard.
Look for another press release to boost the stock price next Monday, September 8, when some of the top execs will be selling again.
Obligatory Technical Documentation link
l
http://www.things.org/~jym/fun/see-figure-1.htm
Basically, the CA Supreme Court said that the Court of Appeals should have considered whether the basis for granting the original injunction was sound. The Court of Appeals said, even assuming it's sound, it's a prior restraint under the First Amendment.
This is still bad news for the DVDCCA becuase their trade secret is no more. In the dissent, one CA Justice was ready to declare it then and there. The majority of justices thought it better to let the Court of Appeals make that determination. It is appealable again after that.
The opinion says that this is a narrow decision. All it says is that there are some circumstances when the courts can order non-disclosure against some individuals.
There's nothing in the GPL which requires this. It is a fiduciary duty that a corporation owes its shareholders.
The problem is that SCO itself distributed the code under the GPL. IBM's claim is that they can't claim it was done without their knowledge because they distributed it themselves. If they are going to distribute, then they have an obligation to their shareholders to make sure that they aren't distributing something which violates their own rights. SCO employees actively participated in kernel development and the development is completely open so that SCO can see what's going into it. When they are so deeply involved in developing Linux themselves, the claim that any distribution was inadvertant becomes less and less plausible.
All it takes is for one home user using VPN or a single laptop user to get infected and then connect to the corporate network to spread it befind the firewall. Blocking port 135 at the firewall is SOP almost everywhere.
Behind the firewall, port 135 is necessary in Windows networks and can't be blocked without massive breakage.
Installing a single copy of a computer program which the user "owns" is not an infringement of Copyright. That's in section 109.
Now, it's hard to say when one "owns" a copy of an infringing work. It appears to me that if you purchase media from a Linux distributor and install it on one OC, you have not infringed.
If you do multiple installs from one piece of media or duplicate that media or patch the kernel (to make a derivative work) or even compile your own kernel, you may have infringed *IF* the SCO Copyright claims have any merit.
Interesting point of view on Copyright by the lawyers. Of course, a legal opinion is just an opinion unless someone can point to law or precedent which clearly establishes the point.
If you run a message board, you have a collective copyright on the entire collaboration (the same way a publisher of a magazine can have a copyright on an issue while the article authors may retain copyright on their individual articles), but it's very unclear that you have a copyright on each individual post absent an assignment or a work for hire situation.
AT&T released several versions of Unix. System V was one susch version which went through several releases, the last of which was System V, Release 4 or SVR4 in 1988. See for a chart.
Sys V refers to the Unix source code as it stood in the mid 80s.