All I mean is that in my opinion, the groklaw comments are a giant sea of boring crap. And I don't care if she deletes the anti-groklaw comments. I just care that she doesn't delete the boring ones.
I'm glad someone said it. I hate PJ's commentary. She is overly partisan. She is obviously taking a flying leap to suggest that SCO is going to start astroturfing, for example.
I don't think they could afford to do it. Not successfully, anyway. It's as if PJ is paranoid.
Whenever she says something worthwhile (not totally uncommon), it shows up in the/. comments too. Basically anytime anyone on the internet says anything even slightly insightful about SCO, it shows up on/. too.
And/. is moderated. If you're reading at -1... astroturfing by SCO is the least of your concerns. For my purposes (I want to only read semi-interesting comments about SCO), Groklaw is unmoderated.
That said:
shall we deflect discussion *away* from OSRM and Pamela? There's an idea
I read some of your stuff on the subject, and... who cares?
From their website, it sounds like the LED brightness is determined by the display. Are you sure that it still needs special drivers in order to modulate the LED brightness?
The sphere would have inertia. It would have to have a few powerfull & very accurate electric motors if it wanted to hide the fact that a large, durable sphere has inertia. Both inertia of rest and inertia once you started moving it in any direction.
Anyway, a neat thing about this floor tile thing is that it's relatively tiny. Your sphere might not have to be 200' around, but it's certainly going to have to be over 6' around. These tiles don't have any external housing. Just looks like one big coat rack sized monitoring device.
Both ideas have different advantages and disadvantages. Neither is going to work great, right?
While I wouldn't consider any Macintosh to be a high-end server, they are also not all used as desktop machines.
So I didn't consider that statement to satisfy my request for explanation. If that's what you meant, though, then I should have. Sorry.
Anyway, there are only two ways this port could be useful: You want to run Solaris on non-Apple PPC hardware (a pServer), or you already have Solaris machines & Power Macs, and now you want the same platform everywhere.
Other posters have made both of these points. So there is (barely?) a reason to run Solaris on a Mac.
The Mach kernel's message-passing scheme for IPC has been known to be slow. Microkernels also typically have worse performance than monolithic kernels.
That's why OS X doesn't use it. XNU, honey.
Solaris uses a monolothic kernel.
Apple has poked holes in their microkernel everywhere they thought needed performance. I see no reason to believe that the micro-vs-monolithic debate can be so easily applied to OS X.
Solaris' scalability has been proven for many years on hardware with many more than two processors.
You are implying that Apple's support for 4 processors or more is not mature. In fact it does not exist. Their support for two processors is just fine, and that's the hardware that y'all would be talking about swapping OS X out for Solaris on. If that made sense.
For industrial grade iron, there is no reason to use MacOS-- it is too young and is not intended to be used on high-end server hardware.
Assuming that your definition of "high-end server hardware" does not include Xserves (mine doesn't) then not only is it not intended, it's not possible. There's no comparison to be made.
Explain why you'd want Solaris rather than OS X on a Macintosh. That was the debate. (I know there are reasons. I don't care about this idiotic debate. But you're talking stupid.)
So, is there a problem with the law? I kind of feel like there is. In fact, I kind of feel like the First Amendment would make whatever law is involved here unconstitutional. Given that we're told our rights to speech CANNOT be infringed, where do we really get off saying that people can't say bad things about other people? Sure, the site tarnishes and disparages Mr. Falwell... so what's the big deal? People tarnish and disparage me all the time. And I dare say Mr. Falwell does his own tarnishing and disparaging of some folks. Why is some of this protected speech and some of it illegal?
The problem isn't just the tarnishing & disparaging.
Free speech is mitigated by many, many things. Fraud, for example, is not free speech. Trademarks, in general, limit speech.
If Pete's Coffee & Tea started handing out coffee bags filled with rat turds, all bearing the Starbucks (TM) logo, I imagine it would activate the same provisions of trademark law that have come up in this case. If that's the case:
IMHO, it's a mediocre ruling. I do not believe that anyone would be confused by the old contents of fallwell.com. I'm not even sure why it counts as tarnishing or disparaging: the site outlines why & how they feel Jerry Falwell is wrong about homosexuals. I guess I don't understand the legal definition of tarnishing and disparaging.
Anyway, independent of the ruling, the guy's URL is lame. He is capitalizing on people misspelling the dude's last name. He should instead work on increasing his page's relevance & well regard on the internet until his new URL (http://www.falwellbigot.com or whatever) is ranked higher than Jerry's official site for the search terms "jerry falwell" on popular search engines. The content on his site is completely solid. I don't see why this is such a problem for him.
If you had used it in that regard, then your point would be true. Since you have not actually used the word that way (any of those times) then your use of the word implies a contradiction. Note my different use of the word.
As everyone else is pointing out, you can just include the criterion in the result set, and do your parameterization that way.
Sometimes this is not feasible. I've never had a purpose for inline functions, as whenever I've needed to parameterize a view, it's because I've also needed to do procedural calculation on those parameters. In such a case, a standard function (with BEGIN and END) is required rather than an inline function.
No. The proper method for simple parameterized views in MS SQL are inline functions. From the "Inline Functions" topic in transact-SQL help:
Inline User-Defined Functions Inline user-defined functions are a subset of user-defined functions that return a table. Inline functions can be used to achieve the functionality of parameterized views.
Consider this view:
CREATE VIEW vw_CustomerNamesInWA AS SELECT CustomerID, CompanyName FROM Northwind.dbo.Customers WHERE Region = 'WA'
You can create a more generalized version, vw_CustomerNamesInRegion, by replacing the WHERE Region = 'WA' with a WHERE Region = @RegionParameter and letting users specify the region they are interested in viewing. Views, however, do not support parameters in the search conditions specified in the WHERE clause.
Inline user-defined functions can be used to support parameters in the search conditions specified in the WHERE clause. This is an example of a function that allows users to specify the region in their select:
CREATE FUNCTION fn_CustomerNamesInRegion
( @RegionParameter nvarchar(30) ) RETURNS table AS RETURN (
SELECT CustomerID, CompanyName
FROM Northwind.dbo.Customers
WHERE Region = @RegionParameter
) GO
-- Example of calling the function for a specific region
SELECT * FROM fn_CustomerNamesInRegion(N'WA') GO
Inline user-defined functions follow these rules:
The RETURNS clause contains only the keyword table. You do not have to define the format of a return variable because it is set by the format of the result set of the SELECT statement in the RETURN clause.
There is no function_body delimited by BEGIN and END.
The RETURN clause contains a single SELECT statement in parentheses. The result set of the SELECT statement forms the table returned by the function. The SELECT statement used in an inline function is subject to the same restrictions as SELECT statements used in views.
<snip> section about using inline functions with indexed views </snip>
Slashdot Mirror
Apparently Starship Troopers wasn't that far fetched. Bugs really do antagonize your city.
No. PJ deletes posts arbitrarily.
All I mean is that in my opinion, the groklaw comments are a giant sea of boring crap. And I don't care if she deletes the anti-groklaw comments. I just care that she doesn't delete the boring ones.
I think you win for most unnecessary uses of cat.
I don't think they could afford to do it. Not successfully, anyway. It's as if PJ is paranoid.
Whenever she says something worthwhile (not totally uncommon), it shows up in the
And
That said:I read some of your stuff on the subject, and... who cares?
Anyway, one entertaining comment on Neil's site shows one example of the threats against Mr. Enderle.
Truck-friendly American?
You can already do that well enough with Audio Hijack.
The remaining problem is synchronization, I think.
Good thing they put in Guile. "For Americans to play."
"Redneck" is not the preferred nomenclature. "Southern-US American", please.
I'll be good god damned if there aren't also rednecks born in Washington state. Dunno about Alaska.
Wouldn't that be a little monotonous? Just Apple, cold beer, and "Poor, poor thing" for your iPod?
Rotational inertia is based on size.
Very few of those features apply to any machine that runs Mac OS X, which is what the dude was asking about.
From their website, it sounds like the LED brightness is determined by the display. Are you sure that it still needs special drivers in order to modulate the LED brightness?
Inertia.
The sphere would have inertia. It would have to have a few powerfull & very accurate electric motors if it wanted to hide the fact that a large, durable sphere has inertia. Both inertia of rest and inertia once you started moving it in any direction.
Anyway, a neat thing about this floor tile thing is that it's relatively tiny. Your sphere might not have to be 200' around, but it's certainly going to have to be over 6' around. These tiles don't have any external housing. Just looks like one big coat rack sized monitoring device.
Both ideas have different advantages and disadvantages. Neither is going to work great, right?
Are you convinced that the floor tiles are 100% automated, and not remotely controlled by an operator?
Wow. That's the dumbest thing I've read on Slashdot in weeks.
No, that is not an OSX computer with 2200 processors.
That is at least 1100 different OSX computers, each with no more than 2 processors.
While I wouldn't consider any Macintosh to be a high-end server, they are also not all used as desktop machines.
So I didn't consider that statement to satisfy my request for explanation. If that's what you meant, though, then I should have. Sorry.
Anyway, there are only two ways this port could be useful: You want to run Solaris on non-Apple PPC hardware (a pServer), or you already have Solaris machines & Power Macs, and now you want the same platform everywhere.
Other posters have made both of these points. So there is (barely?) a reason to run Solaris on a Mac.
Explain why you'd want Solaris rather than OS X on a Macintosh . That was the debate. (I know there are reasons. I don't care about this idiotic debate. But you're talking stupid.)
So, is there a problem with the law? I kind of feel like there is. In fact, I kind of feel like the First Amendment would make whatever law is involved here unconstitutional. Given that we're told our rights to speech CANNOT be infringed, where do we really get off saying that people can't say bad things about other people? Sure, the site tarnishes and disparages Mr. Falwell ... so what's the big deal? People tarnish and disparage me all the time. And I dare say Mr. Falwell does his own tarnishing and disparaging of some folks. Why is some of this protected speech and some of it illegal?
The problem isn't just the tarnishing & disparaging.
Free speech is mitigated by many, many things. Fraud, for example, is not free speech. Trademarks, in general, limit speech.
If Pete's Coffee & Tea started handing out coffee bags filled with rat turds, all bearing the Starbucks (TM) logo, I imagine it would activate the same provisions of trademark law that have come up in this case. If that's the case:
IMHO, it's a mediocre ruling. I do not believe that anyone would be confused by the old contents of fallwell.com. I'm not even sure why it counts as tarnishing or disparaging: the site outlines why & how they feel Jerry Falwell is wrong about homosexuals. I guess I don't understand the legal definition of tarnishing and disparaging.
Anyway, independent of the ruling, the guy's URL is lame. He is capitalizing on people misspelling the dude's last name. He should instead work on increasing his page's relevance & well regard on the internet until his new URL (http://www.falwellbigot.com or whatever) is ranked higher than Jerry's official site for the search terms "jerry falwell" on popular search engines. The content on his site is completely solid. I don't see why this is such a problem for him.
Anyway.
Er, no, I did that all wrong. My use of the word is also not that alternative use of the word actually.
/.er.
Yes, this is actually an admittance of fault on the part of a
If you had used it in that regard, then your point would be true. Since you have not actually used the word that way (any of those times) then your use of the word implies a contradiction. Note my different use of the word.
By using the word "actually", you have implied that your statement contradicts the quoted statement.
As everyone else is pointing out, you can just include the criterion in the result set, and do your parameterization that way.
Sometimes this is not feasible. I've never had a purpose for inline functions, as whenever I've needed to parameterize a view, it's because I've also needed to do procedural calculation on those parameters. In such a case, a standard function (with BEGIN and END) is required rather than an inline function.
Inline User-Defined Functions
Inline user-defined functions are a subset of user-defined functions that return a table. Inline functions can be used to achieve the functionality of parameterized views.
Consider this view:You can create a more generalized version, vw_CustomerNamesInRegion, by replacing the WHERE Region = 'WA' with a WHERE Region = @RegionParameter and letting users specify the region they are interested in viewing. Views, however, do not support parameters in the search conditions specified in the WHERE clause.
Inline user-defined functions can be used to support parameters in the search conditions specified in the WHERE clause. This is an example of a function that allows users to specify the region in their select:-- Example of calling the function for a specific regionInline user-defined functions follow these rules:
The RETURNS clause contains only the keyword table. You do not have to define the format of a return variable because it is set by the format of the result set of the SELECT statement in the RETURN clause.
There is no function_body delimited by BEGIN and END.
The RETURN clause contains a single SELECT statement in parentheses. The result set of the SELECT statement forms the table returned by the function. The SELECT statement used in an inline function is subject to the same restrictions as SELECT statements used in views.
<snip> section about using inline functions with indexed views </snip>
©1988-2000 Microsoft Corporation. All Rights Reserved.
You have to break lines in half with an _
underscore.
All the fucking time.
Right. How many protagonists in English language fiction are named Kovacs?