I did not follow WorldPerfect case closely, but do recall from previous anti-trust case against MS that they would hide their new API's from everyone but themselves, to make sure MS products are first to the market, and then causally disclosing their API's a few months down the road.
Assuming that this is what happened, we can see how Adobe was not affected by this -- MS did not try to compete with them, so being 6 month late to the market is not critical when your competitors are in the same boat.
Let's do an experiment. You create a text editor (Notepad), and I create all external API's for all hardware interaction -- keyboard, screen, file read/write. One condition for the experiment is that you can only go through my API (say, I control 98% of the market), and my code is close-sourced.
In the last month before release I change every API call that you were using. Your program suddenly looses access to keyboard, screen, file system. You say "Hey, I already shipped the product! What's are the API changes?" -- "No changes, I removed it completely. There is an alternative API that MY text editor is using, if you want to know what it is, no problem, I will provide a spec in 6 months or so".
The point is, if you rely on my API, I can pull a rug from under your feet at any moment. It's a short leash you are on.
Adobe, Core, Autodesk, no one else had this problem.
Maybe it is because MS did not target them with a replacement of their own. The fact that MS did not manage to kill ALL non-MS software does not make them any less guilty.
... It could be argued that trying to seize a trademark in connection with a work is tantamount to claiming ownership of that work, which is copyright infringement.
According to your chart, US is #7 largest polluter out of 185 countries, how is that "isn't on top per capita". Not only that, but US has massively larger population than any of the leading 6 countries combined, making them insignificant in comparison.
For some reason everyone wants China to become responsible, ignoring an even bigger problem at home.
Toxic gas was used during WWI and has been outlawed since then. Don't know if biological weapons have ever been used, but they have very same shortcomings, and also outlawed internationally. Here's the problem: the wind blows in the other direction and poisons gas envelops the attacker's own troops.
At any rate poison can be used locally, while disease is almost guaranteed to migrate back to attacker eventually. None of these come close to destruction of a whole city with a single bomb. There is also plenty of toxic radiation emitted to make your nerve gas comparison a joke. And don't forget about various modifications of nuclear bomb: Hydrogen bomb, neutron bomb, salted bomb...
The only argument I expected to hear was about Mother of All Bombs. Still, it is capable of "flattening" only a few city blocks.
Thus, the total US emission is 25% total/capitas * 307,006,550 capitas = 76,751,637.5% of total pollution in the world. Unless you meant something else.
"almost all" was a quote from parent, who referred to China's share, which is also close to 25%. My point was that he take look at his home country before pointing fingers elsewhere.
Bicycle is healthy, no argument there. Meanwhile, 95% of US electric power is generated by BURNING COAL, like it is 1865. Still think your bicycle makes a difference?
And the answer is simple -- do what the French did -- go nuclear. Yes I am aware of the major fud campaign and everyone being scared of any technology they do not understand ("cyber", nuclear....); but someone needs to make a call. We CAN build safe reactors, ones that can withstand both earthquake and tsunami.
A single nation, US of A releases 25% of world's greenhouse gases. "Third world" is not even in the picture here. US beats everyone even in emissions per dollar of economic activity. I don't remember the book name, but here's a world map I found: http://www.worldmapper.org/display.php?selected=299#
Sorry, this is due to Dell's extensive use of cookies, meaning links become invalid after session. Links on Newegg actually work: here's the same thing on Newegg
These are big tablets, 15-23 inch. They are somewhat hefty, but keep in mind that
1. 20" will always be bulky
2. Windows 7 requires quite a bit of processing power in order to be all it can be
Give me a big tablet, between 12 - 21 inches.
Give me a tablet that runs windows.
Give me a tablet that has a stylus, and turns off automatically touch display once the stylus goes out of it's enclosure.
Give me that, for less than 700 (would pay up to 1000 for a 21")
Here you go! 23" for $599, prepare to pay less for "12 - 21 inches". Your dream came true years ago, where have you been?
I read/. on a daily basis and still had no idea. No, Raspberry is no iPhone, not even Linux.
There are some rudimentary publishing rules and adding one sentence in the beginning should not be a problem for those who already know the subject. How about:
Raspberry-Pi, a start-up promising to sell $25 Linux boards in the near future, already has a knock-off site.
The concept would be easier to grasp if you read some articles written by professional writers once in a while.
You know, you could change major without dropping out? I have a friend to completed CS undergrad and then went to med school. Now with the drop out on your permanent record good luck getting through any competitive admissions.
How do you know that the water has not always contained the same amount of methane?
Because the guy in the video says so. I am sorry, linked wrong one, here's the video I meant to link: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TEtgvwllNpg Maybe this is just one of a few episodes, but if true, then this is only the tip of the iceberg. What lies ahead is dead fish and dead forests. You can only rape the land once, and it is gone for many generations ahead. Someone needs to investigate these claims, and I don't mean by paying off the victims sizable lumps of money to shut up.
Any written accounts made before fracking began?
I suppose the gentleman has some inspection or construction papers that indicate that the water was usable. For obvious reasons I do not have access to those records, but if anyone conducts an official investigation they can surely dig them up.
If not, the most likely explanation is that fracking taking places kilometers down does not contaminate water wells tens of meters deep.
That would explain why the problem would not exist, but it does exist.
And please don't use clips from Gasland as a source, the burning water there has been examined, the methane is from natural sources.
I am sorry, don't know what Gasland is. Is the second video also from Gasland? Looks like a private individual to me. yes, the methane is from natural souces, the question is why did it end up in tap water.
the burning water there has been examined
Using your own words: any written accounts?
It is a bad idea to drill your well into a natural gas deposit, and even worse to claim it is other peoples fault that you water is flammable afterwards.
Earlier you said that gas deposits are "kilometers down" do "not contaminate water wells tens of meters deep"? Do you imply that the guy drilled his water well "kilometers down"?
I am sure there are people who have gotten flammable drinking water as a result of oil or gas mining
Thank you for finally agreeing.
why use an example where that is demonstrably not the case?
Any references that demonstrate that?
It simply makes it far too easy to dismiss any reasonable complaints.
I had to maintain a system written by "self-taught programmers" for many years. Things were not split in files or even procedures, it looked like a gigantic heap of "if-else" statements. It would break daily. No one knew how it worked and it was a nightmare to reverse-engineer.
I mean sure, they wrote that code very quickly and got all promoted to management, leaving the steaming wreck behind for others to maintain. Subsequently, a group of 60 was hired to maintain a code base that normally would be managed by a team of 5 -- and all 60 had their hands full keeping this real-time trading platform breathing.
For some weird reason Software Development is the only "skilled" profession where they hire total strangers. Everyone can write "Hello World", right? Where are the self-taught mathematicians, physicists, accountants? Interesting times.
Also, about doing things the "right" way -- development of software is only a small fraction of future maintenance cost. By shaving a few days off development today you are setting your company for many years of hemorrhoid, until your "masterpiece" is finally scrapped and rewritten at no small expense but to everyone's great relief.
My guess is that including gas fracking back into the "Clean Water and Air Act" will go a long way to "encourage the use of industry best practices", otherwise we are looking at another BP Gulf of Mexico type disaster, except this time in Pennsylvania.
The study you linked refers to drilling, not fracking specifically. It only covers 180 houses in a very narrow area, and does nothing to explain known incidents, nor does it even acknowledge them. Here's a "short" list of some known pollution issues:
There are, however, documented incidents of contamination. In 2006 drilling fluids and methane were detected leaking from the ground near a gas well in Clark, Wyoming; 8 million cubic feet of methane were eventually released, and shallow groundwater was found to be contaminated.[22] In the town of Dimock, Pennsylvania, 13 water wells were contaminated with methane (one of them blew up), and the gas company, Cabot Oil & Gas, had to financially compensate residents and construct a pipeline to bring in clean water; the company continued to deny, however, that any "of the issues in Dimock have anything to do with hydraulic fracturing".[25][21]
A Duke University study published in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences in 2011 examined methane in groundwater in Pennsylvania and New York states overlying the Marcellus Shale and the Utica Shale. It determined that groundwater tended to contain much higher concentrations of methane near fracking wells, with potential explosion hazard; the methane's isotopic signatures and other geochemical indicators were consistent with it originating in the fracked deep shale formations, rather than any other source.[26] Complaints from a few residents on water quality in a developed natural gas field prompted an EPA groundwater investigation in Wyoming. The EPA reported detections of methane and other chemicals such as phthalates in private water wells.[27]
In Pavillion, Wyoming, the EPA discovered traces of methane and foaming agents in several water wells near a gas rig, though it suggested these chemicals might have come from cleaning products.[25] In DISH, Texas, elevated levels of disulphides, benzene, xylenes and naphthalene have been detected in the air, alongside numerous local complaints of headaches, diarrhoea, nosebleeds, dizziness, muscle spasms and other problems. Epidemiological studies that might confirm or rule out any connection between these complaints and fracking are virtually non-existent. Individuals "smell things that don't make them feel well, but we know nothing about cause-and-effect relationships in these cases."[28] In Garfield County, Colorado, another area with a high concentration of drilling rigs, volatile organic compound emissions increased 30% between 2004 and 2006; during the same period there was a rash of health complaints from local residents. The health effects of VOCs are largely unquantified, so any causal relationship is difficult to ascertain; however, some of these chemicals are suspected carcinogens and neurotoxins.[22] Investigators from the Colorado School of Public Health performed a study in Garfield regarding potential adverse health effects, and concluded that residents near gas wells might suffer chemical exposures, accidents from industry operations, and psychological impacts such as depression, anxiety and stress. This study (the only one of its kind to date) was never published, owing to disagreements between community members and the drilling company over the study's methods.[28]
In 2010 the film Gasland premiered at the Sundance Film Festival. The filmmaker claims that chemicals including toxins, known carcinogens, and heavy metals polluted the ground water near well sites in Pennsylvania, Wyoming, and Colorado.[29]
Slashdot Mirror
That was a hyperbole. The queue is "Let's do an experiment." Think of it as a "car example".
I did not follow WorldPerfect case closely, but do recall from previous anti-trust case against MS that they would hide their new API's from everyone but themselves, to make sure MS products are first to the market, and then causally disclosing their API's a few months down the road.
Assuming that this is what happened, we can see how Adobe was not affected by this -- MS did not try to compete with them, so being 6 month late to the market is not critical when your competitors are in the same boat.
In the last month before release I change every API call that you were using. Your program suddenly looses access to keyboard, screen, file system. You say "Hey, I already shipped the product! What's are the API changes?" -- "No changes, I removed it completely. There is an alternative API that MY text editor is using, if you want to know what it is, no problem, I will provide a spec in 6 months or so".
The point is, if you rely on my API, I can pull a rug from under your feet at any moment. It's a short leash you are on.
Adobe, Core, Autodesk, no one else had this problem.
Maybe it is because MS did not target them with a replacement of their own. The fact that MS did not manage to kill ALL non-MS software does not make them any less guilty.
... It could be argued that trying to seize a trademark in connection with a work is tantamount to claiming ownership of that work, which is copyright infringement.
http://search.dilbert.com/search?w=april+16&x=0&y=0
Well said! They are in the business of "publishing" and "distribution", something that has been free since the 90s
According to your chart, US is #7 largest polluter out of 185 countries, how is that "isn't on top per capita". Not only that, but US has massively larger population than any of the leading 6 countries combined, making them insignificant in comparison.
For some reason everyone wants China to become responsible, ignoring an even bigger problem at home.
Dear moderator, care to explain what "25% PER CAPITA [of world's greenhouse emissions]" is before down-modding me?
Toxic gas was used during WWI and has been outlawed since then. Don't know if biological weapons have ever been used, but they have very same shortcomings, and also outlawed internationally. Here's the problem: the wind blows in the other direction and poisons gas envelops the attacker's own troops.
At any rate poison can be used locally, while disease is almost guaranteed to migrate back to attacker eventually. None of these come close to destruction of a whole city with a single bomb. There is also plenty of toxic radiation emitted to make your nerve gas comparison a joke. And don't forget about various modifications of nuclear bomb: Hydrogen bomb, neutron bomb, salted bomb...
The only argument I expected to hear was about Mother of All Bombs. Still, it is capable of "flattening" only a few city blocks.
25% PER CAPITA
Thus, the total US emission is 25% total/capitas * 307,006,550 capitas = 76,751,637.5% of total pollution in the world. Unless you meant something else.
"It's almost all China" was the point parent made about China's ~25%. I merely pointed out the irony of that.
"almost all" was a quote from parent, who referred to China's share, which is also close to 25%. My point was that he take look at his home country before pointing fingers elsewhere.
Sorry, that was off the top of my head. According to your document it is burning coal + gas + oil, all of which emit massive quantities of CO2.
The Bomb is an outdated weapon.
Superseded by what, exactly? Crossbows?
Bicycle is healthy, no argument there. Meanwhile, 95% of US electric power is generated by BURNING COAL, like it is 1865. Still think your bicycle makes a difference?
And the answer is simple -- do what the French did -- go nuclear. Yes I am aware of the major fud campaign and everyone being scared of any technology they do not understand ("cyber", nuclear....); but someone needs to make a call. We CAN build safe reactors, ones that can withstand both earthquake and tsunami.
As for pointing fingers to China, that might not work for US -- a source of 25% of global greenhouse pollution.
No, mon ami, it is almost all US. In fact, about 25% of world greenhouse emissions, more than any other nation, even if weighted by economic activity.
Beware of any statistics presented in English, for the publishers have an obvious incentive to skew the output for political reasons.
A single nation, US of A releases 25% of world's greenhouse gases. "Third world" is not even in the picture here. US beats everyone even in emissions per dollar of economic activity. I don't remember the book name, but here's a world map I found: http://www.worldmapper.org/display.php?selected=299#
These are big tablets, 15-23 inch. They are somewhat hefty, but keep in mind that
1. 20" will always be bulky
2. Windows 7 requires quite a bit of processing power in order to be all it can be
Give me a big tablet, between 12 - 21 inches. Give me a tablet that runs windows. Give me a tablet that has a stylus, and turns off automatically touch display once the stylus goes out of it's enclosure. Give me that, for less than 700 (would pay up to 1000 for a 21")
Here you go! 23" for $599, prepare to pay less for "12 - 21 inches". Your dream came true years ago, where have you been?
There are some rudimentary publishing rules and adding one sentence in the beginning should not be a problem for those who already know the subject. How about:
Raspberry-Pi, a start-up promising to sell $25 Linux boards in the near future, already has a knock-off site.
The concept would be easier to grasp if you read some articles written by professional writers once in a while.
You know, you could change major without dropping out? I have a friend to completed CS undergrad and then went to med school. Now with the drop out on your permanent record good luck getting through any competitive admissions.
How do you know that the water has not always contained the same amount of methane?
Because the guy in the video says so. I am sorry, linked wrong one, here's the video I meant to link:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TEtgvwllNpg
Maybe this is just one of a few episodes, but if true, then this is only the tip of the iceberg. What lies ahead is dead fish and dead forests. You can only rape the land once, and it is gone for many generations ahead. Someone needs to investigate these claims, and I don't mean by paying off the victims sizable lumps of money to shut up.
Any written accounts made before fracking began?
I suppose the gentleman has some inspection or construction papers that indicate that the water was usable. For obvious reasons I do not have access to those records, but if anyone conducts an official investigation they can surely dig them up.
If not, the most likely explanation is that fracking taking places kilometers down does not contaminate water wells tens of meters deep.
That would explain why the problem would not exist, but it does exist.
And please don't use clips from Gasland as a source, the burning water there has been examined, the methane is from natural sources.
I am sorry, don't know what Gasland is. Is the second video also from Gasland? Looks like a private individual to me. yes, the methane is from natural souces, the question is why did it end up in tap water.
the burning water there has been examined
Using your own words: any written accounts?
It is a bad idea to drill your well into a natural gas deposit, and even worse to claim it is other peoples fault that you water is flammable afterwards.
Earlier you said that gas deposits are "kilometers down" do "not contaminate water wells tens of meters deep"? Do you imply that the guy drilled his water well "kilometers down"?
I am sure there are people who have gotten flammable drinking water as a result of oil or gas mining
Thank you for finally agreeing.
why use an example where that is demonstrably not the case?
Any references that demonstrate that?
It simply makes it far too easy to dismiss any reasonable complaints.
And that's what you are trying to do.
I had to maintain a system written by "self-taught programmers" for many years. Things were not split in files or even procedures, it looked like a gigantic heap of "if-else" statements. It would break daily. No one knew how it worked and it was a nightmare to reverse-engineer.
I mean sure, they wrote that code very quickly and got all promoted to management, leaving the steaming wreck behind for others to maintain. Subsequently, a group of 60 was hired to maintain a code base that normally would be managed by a team of 5 -- and all 60 had their hands full keeping this real-time trading platform breathing.
For some weird reason Software Development is the only "skilled" profession where they hire total strangers. Everyone can write "Hello World", right? Where are the self-taught mathematicians, physicists, accountants? Interesting times.
Also, about doing things the "right" way -- development of software is only a small fraction of future maintenance cost. By shaving a few days off development today you are setting your company for many years of hemorrhoid, until your "masterpiece" is finally scrapped and rewritten at no small expense but to everyone's great relief.
no evidence that this is occurring
Please see the video in my post above for "some evidence".
This study blames known instances of methane contamination on a small number of sub-standard operations, and encourages the use of industry best practices to prevent such events from recurring.[30]
My guess is that including gas fracking back into the "Clean Water and Air Act" will go a long way to "encourage the use of industry best practices", otherwise we are looking at another BP Gulf of Mexico type disaster, except this time in Pennsylvania.
There are, however, documented incidents of contamination. In 2006 drilling fluids and methane were detected leaking from the ground near a gas well in Clark, Wyoming; 8 million cubic feet of methane were eventually released, and shallow groundwater was found to be contaminated.[22] In the town of Dimock, Pennsylvania, 13 water wells were contaminated with methane (one of them blew up), and the gas company, Cabot Oil & Gas, had to financially compensate residents and construct a pipeline to bring in clean water; the company continued to deny, however, that any "of the issues in Dimock have anything to do with hydraulic fracturing".[25][21] A Duke University study published in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences in 2011 examined methane in groundwater in Pennsylvania and New York states overlying the Marcellus Shale and the Utica Shale. It determined that groundwater tended to contain much higher concentrations of methane near fracking wells, with potential explosion hazard; the methane's isotopic signatures and other geochemical indicators were consistent with it originating in the fracked deep shale formations, rather than any other source.[26] Complaints from a few residents on water quality in a developed natural gas field prompted an EPA groundwater investigation in Wyoming. The EPA reported detections of methane and other chemicals such as phthalates in private water wells.[27] In Pavillion, Wyoming, the EPA discovered traces of methane and foaming agents in several water wells near a gas rig, though it suggested these chemicals might have come from cleaning products.[25] In DISH, Texas, elevated levels of disulphides, benzene, xylenes and naphthalene have been detected in the air, alongside numerous local complaints of headaches, diarrhoea, nosebleeds, dizziness, muscle spasms and other problems. Epidemiological studies that might confirm or rule out any connection between these complaints and fracking are virtually non-existent. Individuals "smell things that don't make them feel well, but we know nothing about cause-and-effect relationships in these cases."[28] In Garfield County, Colorado, another area with a high concentration of drilling rigs, volatile organic compound emissions increased 30% between 2004 and 2006; during the same period there was a rash of health complaints from local residents. The health effects of VOCs are largely unquantified, so any causal relationship is difficult to ascertain; however, some of these chemicals are suspected carcinogens and neurotoxins.[22] Investigators from the Colorado School of Public Health performed a study in Garfield regarding potential adverse health effects, and concluded that residents near gas wells might suffer chemical exposures, accidents from industry operations, and psychological impacts such as depression, anxiety and stress. This study (the only one of its kind to date) was never published, owing to disagreements between community members and the drilling company over the study's methods.[28] In 2010 the film Gasland premiered at the Sundance Film Festival. The filmmaker claims that chemicals including toxins, known carcinogens, and heavy metals polluted the ground water near well sites in Pennsylvania, Wyoming, and Colorado.[29]