The problem is the Microsoft way of displaying fonts.
I don't like the way Adobe normally have there software maid. Cant stand flash or their reider. Nor is the CS suit any good. But on this issue they do something good.
You might not like how Apple display text on their screens, feels blurry maybe. However the fonts are far more correct and give u close to WYSIWYG. Here the Adobe reader actually portray text good, on a windows machine too.
The Apple way i prefer, but that will not bee good until screens have similar ppi as the Apple iPhone 4. Todays 126 ppi is way to low.
But for the screens to get better, we need a resolution independent OS. Not sure who is closest to make such one, Apple with iOS? But if screen resultion would get closer to 300ppi, then the Apple way of displaying fonts would be rally great. And microsoft could then easyly adopt same algorithms, as they are simpler than the one Microsoft uses, but still true to the shape of the charactes. Which Microsofts way of displaying text isn't.
Adobe does here a good compromize, close to real WYSIWYG, but still quite sharp text.
True, but it's their work not their kids work. Let the kids write their own bestseller, or try an other carere.
But copyright's after ones death is bs imo. Same with patents. Corporate owned copyrights, and patents should have a life time around 15-30 years. Well maybe up to 50. Private copyrights/patents should die with the owner.
True but that is a crime, why there are crime investigators. If we concider crime as a way of living when shaping our laws. Well what is then so crimial with crimes?
However patents should not be able to change owner, a patent should die with it's owner. In company model this means when a company holds a patent, the patents becomes invalid when the company is subemerged into an other owner. While the owner of the company holding the patent can change, the company cannot give the patent holding to a other company. When a company is bankrupt or inactiv the patent should die.
Same thing with persons holding patents, the patents should not be able to gain a new owner. That way you protect the inventor and their work, but nobody else can capitalize on someone elses work.
With such a model patents would do what they are ment for. Maybe also company patents should have a lifetime restriction, e.g. 15-30 years, as companies might not ever die, or get subemerged into other companies.
The first virus, made on Apple, the first spreadsheets made on Apple, the first etc etc...
It's the wannabees that used other systems:P
Well thet ain entirely true, real nerds shifted from Apple to NeXT, then back to Apple after a short turn using PC hardware running Openstep. But that's all history and it's back to where it belongs.
have u hacked away iTunes? Or do you use iTunes? Is the registry corrupted? Try clean out itunes and reinstall, you on windows I assume, that is the standard repair action. If not that works, reformat your harddrive, install windows from scratch install security software, install itunes. If the problem persist try an other security software vendor or whipe it again and don't install security software. If the problem still persist, get an ohter PC.
If all is fine after security system and itunes installation. Install additional software to you computer and inbetween each intallation test if the problem reacures. If it does, wipe that software that caused it. If it still occures wipe your harddrive again install windows, security software, then the conflicting applicaiton, then iTunes. If the problem persists. Wipe the harddrive install windows, security software, itunes but not the conflikting application.
Procede with testing all the other softwere you still haven't tested and repeat the above process mentioned for conficting applications.
If all is fine, but only one conflicting application is found, consider scraping it and find a replacement, or find out all the registy entries and changes it makes at installment, and hack it to work properly again.
Want a sure bet of a system that is dead on arival, bet on N900.
N900 goes out of support with MeGoo, MeGoo is not N900, but N900 is used as develpment platform for MeGoo. N900 was dead on arival.
For me a former Nokia user, the iPhone4 has freed me from lookups. Is'nt it ironic? The closed Apple hardware is more open than the other Nokias, Androids, that are base on open software...
Well most of you wont get it until you actually used Apple hardware, and software. It's not the specifications, or the features that makes Apple gadgets good. It's the semless integration and backup of standards.
OGG, mkv, x.264, flash, they are not standards, neither are Android or Windows in any flavor, nor MacOSX. But AAC, h.264 are. Apple supports them, as they support many other standards, While both Linux(android), and Windows in any flavor fails in supporting standards, open or propretary standrards. But Apple support most of them.
That is why iOS, OSX are greater, than others, well that is one of the main reasons. An other is that Apple tries to standardize everyting they come up with, e.g. GCD and blocks for C, FireWire, Facetime...
That might be the only reason why facetime might succeed over all other non standard video calling funktions on other phones. In that sence Apple is first.
The only vorries a Apple user can have is that they might buy periphals to their apple hardware, that dont follow standards, But implemented their own vierd un supported protokolls and formats. But when you buy ecuipment that follows an standard, you can be sure that it works with Apple products.
Heck my unsupported mouse from logitech functions on the mac even if there are no drivers available, got an MX518. There are other mice that have mac drivers from logitech, but those where not found at the market place I bought it from. Still all functions works as they should.
Only drawback, there is no way in OSX to turn off acceleratoin while gameing, or there are some hacks but still.
No the quite new Nokia I have, that I am equipped with for free trough my company, did not cut it. I bought an iPhone for my own money, converted the company simcard to a micro simcard. Now my company phone is my own iphone.
Android is quite OK, but no it does not stand up against iOS.
Yes probelm is that people here don't differenciate Murder and manslaughter. But they are different.
Motive behind a murder, should not call for difference. But motive might show the difference between what act that was comitted. And what act that was committed calls for different judgements.
I'm not a lawyer but hey, this should be common knowledge. Accidents can happen, still you might be called responsible for that accident. E.g. dig a hole in the street ("legally") what ever reason. Don't mark it and set up warning signs clear ahead. You can be charged for the accidents that happend. No you did not cause the accident, but your still responsible.
If you did you part, there is that should be layed on you. But if you didn't an accident can be enough for jail, even if you wheren't directly involved in the accident.
There should be different judgements depending on different acts. But motive or intetion is never the act. However they help in judgeing what act actually was commited. And it's the type of act that is basis for the judgement.
Now how do you know that it was murder in the first place, could have been manslaughter. One is more serious act than the other, the result is though the same. But that is also tru with an accident where one is killed.
Motive is never the cause, but if I have a motive it's more likely to be a murder than a manslaughter. That is why motive is important, it's all about how to judge the one commiting the crime.
But a man slauther att the sidewalk or in a home should be no difference, neither should there be a difference between a murder on the street or in a home. But there is a difference between murder, and manslughter. A murderer is also less likely to regret his acts, or to confess his acts, it's all planned usually also planed not to get caught.
A manslaughter does not plan, he acts at the specific moment, his not a murderer but has becom guilty of a crime "in the heat of that moment". Which he might not have committed if given time to calm down. The second scenario should be subject to consideration of the type of judgement brought upon him or her. While a murderer should be shown less flexibility in form of judgement. The second could be in consideration of mental health care under controlled forms and in some situations that could be enough, especially if the convict is willing to serv any time given him (which is a sign of great regret and understanding of the severity of his or her commited crime).
There is no reason to keep a person who wont act similary again in a prison, as long as it can be confirmed that he or she most likely wont. An other murderer might not regret, or understand the severity of his crime, or he might not subject to the laws willingly. There are little need for showing flexibilty or mercy on such a criminal.
Motive is very important to know in these situation. But you might have a motive but still be innosent of a crime. Same goes for intention, but if someone have intention, that it selfe should call for judicial actions, of proactive kind.
If I had the intention to kill John Doe, but didn't kill him someone else was first, I still should receive some judgement, ofcource it should be on an idividual base, of proactive care to change my ways.
It's not only in the persons own intrests it's in the intrests of the community. To lock in person in prisons, who might not need to be there is very innefective and costly. If such a person can get care to fix his inclanation then he or she is useful to the community.
Now again if your name was John Doe it was not you.
didn't he say he didnt care about motive, intent and motive are not the same.
I can have a motive to kill John Doe, but I don't have the intent to. Motive motivates, it does not cause or act, and it's lesser than the intention. I could have the intention to kill John Doe, it has still not caused me to but will if given the chance. The chance is also subjected to variables. Could be at every or any chance. Or at the chance where getting caught is minimized. Which is also subjected to vary. As there might be different levels of aceptable chance of getting cought.
Disclaimer: Now this was just to describe, if your name happen to be John Doe it's not you that is mentioned.
Revenge can be motivated by love atctually, the love for the one suffering from a crime. But a revange is still a crime, if not legally a crime it's morally.
Those who confess to crhistianty should know this, "-the revenge is mine", not yours, not even the one suffering from a crime should revenge. Musslims are more close to the ancient Jewish system where ther revenge belonged to the family of the one suffering from a crime, though the modern musslim way is nowhere near the orign, where the one guilty was punished, but now usually the victim is punished especially if it happend to be a woman.
And for those who are non belivers or atheists, well the teaching of moral which our laws base on; have their orign in different religions. The western way has it origns in the chistian teachings. Some base their laws on Islam, and other base them on some other religion.
So religion has had a key role in the laws made, and in teaching a sertain amount of moral knowledge. And before someone says the western way is based on Roman right. Rome chose "christianity" as their state church, today known as the catholic church... church of Rome. I dont say I agree with their teachings or the others mentioned. But they still have played their role in forming modern law systems like it or not, but it's a fact.
Even the modern state of Israel is "thanks to" or "due to" the Christian belives that where strong during that time period. Israel would not have existed today if it where not due to Christianity. And many christian bodies still belive that Israel is where Jesus will appear in his second coming. This was the forse behind forming a modern Israel. Where christian leaders agreed on forming an new state of Israel, sort of "helping Jesus in his works". Their methods where not that "chirstian" but still we can recognise the force religion has had on politics and still have.
This became a bit oftopic, but I hope I brought some perspective into the diskussion. Sertanaly a crime is a crime, wheter it was hate or love or any other motive.
Motive as I mentioned earlier only is a way of meassuring type of deed from the one comitting a crime, was it a murder, manslaughter or an accident. An accident is actually usually not a crime, though it's results are no less severe. Aslo different judgments are made on depending on if it was a murder or an manslaughter. (I hope the words have the same meaning as in my native language*).
*)Murder, an planed act of killing a fellowman, manslaugher an unplanned act of killing a fellowman ("in the heat of the moment").
An kill in an accident, is an accident, the result is just as severe as in the case of the murderer, but the cause is way different. Motive is usually also used as a key to find if it was a murder, manslaughter (sounds bad in english dråp in swedish) or accident. Mostly between the first two.
If I have a motive to kill someone it's more likely that I commit a murder and not manslaughter. The result is the same of the both, howerver calls for different judgement as the first one of them is rawer then the second, a planed act versus an impulsive act, 'that might have been provoked'. Murdere could also be provoked but is more sever as the one in act has had time to calm down and rethink his actions.
But it does not mather where the crime happens, if it's at the sidewalk, on a cargo ship in the middle of pacific ocean or in the mountains, or desert of nevada.
So place and time of the act should not matter, but motive, way of action with other variables are still very important features to consider. But a crime is a crime, no need to give specail names to crimes done on different locations.
Basically the law says if ur a major telekomunication company your forced to rent your bandwidth. If your a small local company, this law will not apply.
Well, while on the nokia, Ovi and other sources of app, sucked. I had to use hours to find the applications I wanted, I had to google every featrure i wanted for symbian s60. And most of the time the applications where totally crap.
Under iOS i go to Appstore, search for the feature I want, read the reviews and decide which one of them to opt for. Faster, better, and freekingly much simpler.
The freedome here is that iOS devices is not a monopoly, you can opt for the IMO infernor options like Nokia, or Android. You have all the freedom you need. Appstore is good because it forces developers to one distribution model, that is the absolut best thing with it. Then the censor ship can be argued.
I'm much freer on Apple DRM iphone4 than I ever was on the open Nokia I had.
I have come to the conclution freedom has to be governed, otherwice freedom will close it self up. Perfect exaple of this is the mobile market in USA. The American way is the liberal way, however, my mobile is much freer in Finland an many other countries due to the fact that there are governing laws on how competition is allowed to act.
In my homecountry Finland, GMS and NMT mobiles where never allowed to be sold with a carrier plan. Result was that carriers didn't have huge stocks of phones in their shops. Yes they had some phones, but most people piced up their phone at a regular store or electronics store. Then they opted for their carrier.
The law was reviwed to boost 3G development, now the carriers are allowed to sell phones with contract and even lock the phone to it. However, no carrier is allowed to build their own antennas in an area where there allready exists an antenna. Eeach carrier can compete on bringing the anntenna first to an area, but are forced to rent the bandwith to competitors. And that is freedom for everyone. The consumer and the carrier.
A reslut of that is that new carriers have turned up, who have no network them selves but rent from the bigger carriers. And yes they are competitive. No maintenance costs, and can bargine high network trafic prices with the network owners. It's again a win win situation.
But the market is not free as in free beer ala American market. And I've seen the same with the iOS products, yes they close me to Appstore, but infact that has been a positive thing for me as an consumer. And I argue that it generally has been a positive thing for developers, though there are exeptions.
But Nokia OVI sucks because the market is fragmented, and that is true for Androids also I experienced last week.
No, I hate flash when it's used for good thins too. Flash based hompages, they nasty to navigate, never complete and they are in Flash.
In fact if I want to view a product's hompage to learn about it, and it's only flash based I leave that page and wont buy the product. Not in America where test and return if not good is the paradigm. Where I live the sentence not good enough for me isn't a legal reson to return a product. They vill refuse taking it back, if good they give me the option to buy an other product from them for the same money, refound is non existing.
I have developed a quality tool for my self. If online product sheet is only availabe in flash, the product will suck in 9 out of 9.1 cases. "Pun inteded".
I've also have had problems with flash on such a simple flash page as Google maps. Number one reason to buy an iPhone over an Andriod is that by buying iPhone I'm part of creating a market that is flash free. If that market is attraktive market for content creators, including advertising, that market will one day kill Flash.
I support that fully, got my iphone 4, had nokia with flash block earlier, my wife had bothe 3g and 3gs before i had an iphone. Well it turns out I doo more with an non flash phone like iPhone than on a flash enabled.
It's a win win situation. I get more, I have a flash free experiece, and I'm actively part of killing Flash. I'm happy.
Instead of banning your students from reading refence materials during the tests, encourage them to.
I personally had test's where the teachers have allowed the students to bring any materials with them. In my opinnion this is the correct aproach. However it requires of you as a lector to reform your tests acordingly. Instead of testing their memory capabilities of memorating anything you might have taught them, you need to start testing their problem solving capabilities.
I remember very well one physics test I had, I got a 5 out of 5 possible, scale 0-5. I didn't know the formulas to use, and didn't trust the formulas i had was the correct one to use. But I solved the problem, by drawing some triangles and calculating forses with them instead. My teacher was amused, and watched me doing the calculations. I was the last one to still sit down doing the test, and time was running out, got nervous, last triangle to draw and last force calculation to calculate, and i had a minute left. Due to the stress I constantly drawed the triangle wrongly, erased it and drawed again, same results that i knew was wrong, erased. The lecturer was watching and calculated on his calculator, laughed and watched me doing the triangle wrong way again. Then he said, "No, not that way".
That sentece opend my mind, I drew the triangle correctly made the calculation and handed in the paper, a few seconds late. It was 1 of 5 or 6 problems to solve in that test. Got 5 out of 5. Later the teacher said, that he liked the way I solved the problem, it's not about knowing the correct formula to use or knowing how to use the formulas. But understanding the problem.
With this I just wanted to say, make your tests in such way that it forces the students to understand the problem, if they do understand the problem let them use any means they can to solve it. In this way your students will be better equipeed after the exams, than those who have memorized methods for the tests but have no clue of the inner workings of the matters. These studenst who have memorized for the tests, will always perform at the test. But try them once more 6-12 months later on same subject, and they fail.
Make your test in such way and you won't have to trouble your mind on what gadgets they happen to use at the tests, you wont even need to monitor the tests that much, except from them cheating by looking over an others shoulder.
An other thing you need to consider is time usage, how much time can you allow your studenst to use in solving the problem, ofcoruse not so much that they could take an online course on the matter while doing the test. But enought to find fromulas and guidance on how to use them.
It puts you in the situation that you need to carefully consider the construction of your tests, but it will reward you with good students, and intresting test material to review.
Anyone not beliving in what Steve Jobs said was true?
Well anyway I've nerver liked Flas since it's release. And i have serveral times refused the installation of it. ATM I refuse installing Flash 10 separately.
Flash has alwaysed been bad, wheter it's om my Work Windows PC or my home Mac, it simply sux. Further more Flash can hijack webpages totally, by allowing to scale it's window and even scale to full screen. I simply hate Flash!
Slashdot Mirror
The problem is the Microsoft way of displaying fonts.
I don't like the way Adobe normally have there software maid. Cant stand flash or their reider. Nor is the CS suit any good. But on this issue they do something good.
You might not like how Apple display text on their screens, feels blurry maybe. However the fonts are far more correct and give u close to WYSIWYG. Here the Adobe reader actually portray text good, on a windows machine too.
The Apple way i prefer, but that will not bee good until screens have similar ppi as the Apple iPhone 4. Todays 126 ppi is way to low.
But for the screens to get better, we need a resolution independent OS. Not sure who is closest to make such one, Apple with iOS? But if screen resultion would get closer to 300ppi, then the Apple way of displaying fonts would be rally great. And microsoft could then easyly adopt same algorithms, as they are simpler than the one Microsoft uses, but still true to the shape of the charactes. Which Microsofts way of displaying text isn't.
Adobe does here a good compromize, close to real WYSIWYG, but still quite sharp text.
Ever used OSX?
True, but it's their work not their kids work. Let the kids write their own bestseller, or try an other carere.
But copyright's after ones death is bs imo. Same with patents. Corporate owned copyrights, and patents should have a life time around 15-30 years. Well maybe up to 50. Private copyrights/patents should die with the owner.
True but that is a crime, why there are crime investigators. If we concider crime as a way of living when shaping our laws. Well what is then so crimial with crimes?
Patents are good, not evil.
However patents should not be able to change owner, a patent should die with it's owner. In company model this means when a company holds a patent, the patents becomes invalid when the company is subemerged into an other owner. While the owner of the company holding the patent can change, the company cannot give the patent holding to a other company. When a company is bankrupt or inactiv the patent should die.
Same thing with persons holding patents, the patents should not be able to gain a new owner. That way you protect the inventor and their work, but nobody else can capitalize on someone elses work.
With such a model patents would do what they are ment for. Maybe also company patents should have a lifetime restriction, e.g. 15-30 years, as companies might not ever die, or get subemerged into other companies.
The real nerds has always been Apple users...
The first virus, made on Apple, the first spreadsheets made on Apple, the first etc etc...
It's the wannabees that used other systems :P
Well thet ain entirely true, real nerds shifted from Apple to NeXT, then back to Apple after a short turn using PC hardware running Openstep. But that's all history and it's back to where it belongs.
Android had just 88 reported vulnerabilities due to kernel...
have u hacked away iTunes? Or do you use iTunes? Is the registry corrupted? Try clean out itunes and reinstall, you on windows I assume, that is the standard repair action. If not that works, reformat your harddrive, install windows from scratch install security software, install itunes. If the problem persist try an other security software vendor or whipe it again and don't install security software. If the problem still persist, get an ohter PC.
If all is fine after security system and itunes installation. Install additional software to you computer and inbetween each intallation test if the problem reacures. If it does, wipe that software that caused it. If it still occures wipe your harddrive again install windows, security software, then the conflicting applicaiton, then iTunes. If the problem persists. Wipe the harddrive install windows, security software, itunes but not the conflikting application.
Procede with testing all the other softwere you still haven't tested and repeat the above process mentioned for conficting applications.
If all is fine, but only one conflicting application is found, consider scraping it and find a replacement, or find out all the registy entries and changes it makes at installment, and hack it to work properly again.
Or then just get a Mac.
Most geeks ingnored Apple Newton too, who is behind webos? Check history.
Want a sure bet of a system that is dead on arival, bet on N900.
N900 goes out of support with MeGoo, MeGoo is not N900, but N900 is used as develpment platform for MeGoo. N900 was dead on arival.
For me a former Nokia user, the iPhone4 has freed me from lookups. Is'nt it ironic? The closed Apple hardware is more open than the other Nokias, Androids, that are base on open software...
Well most of you wont get it until you actually used Apple hardware, and software. It's not the specifications, or the features that makes Apple gadgets good. It's the semless integration and backup of standards.
OGG, mkv, x.264, flash, they are not standards, neither are Android or Windows in any flavor, nor MacOSX.
But AAC, h.264 are. Apple supports them, as they support many other standards, While both Linux(android), and Windows in any flavor fails in supporting standards, open or propretary standrards. But Apple support most of them.
That is why iOS, OSX are greater, than others, well that is one of the main reasons. An other is that Apple tries to standardize everyting they come up with, e.g. GCD and blocks for C, FireWire, Facetime...
That might be the only reason why facetime might succeed over all other non standard video calling funktions on other phones. In that sence Apple is first.
The only vorries a Apple user can have is that they might buy periphals to their apple hardware, that dont follow standards, But implemented their own vierd un supported protokolls and formats. But when you buy ecuipment that follows an standard, you can be sure that it works with Apple products.
Heck my unsupported mouse from logitech functions on the mac even if there are no drivers available, got an MX518. There are other mice that have mac drivers from logitech, but those where not found at the market place I bought it from. Still all functions works as they should.
Only drawback, there is no way in OSX to turn off acceleratoin while gameing, or there are some hacks but still.
No the quite new Nokia I have, that I am equipped with for free trough my company, did not cut it. I bought an iPhone for my own money, converted the company simcard to a micro simcard. Now my company phone is my own iphone.
Android is quite OK, but no it does not stand up against iOS.
Yes probelm is that people here don't differenciate Murder and manslaughter. But they are different.
Motive behind a murder, should not call for difference. But motive might show the difference between what act that was comitted. And what act that was committed calls for different judgements.
I'm not a lawyer but hey, this should be common knowledge.
Accidents can happen, still you might be called responsible for that accident. E.g. dig a hole in the street ("legally") what ever reason. Don't mark it and set up warning signs clear ahead. You can be charged for the accidents that happend. No you did not cause the accident, but your still responsible.
If you did you part, there is that should be layed on you. But if you didn't an accident can be enough for jail, even if you wheren't directly involved in the accident.
There should be different judgements depending on different acts. But motive or intetion is never the act. However they help in judgeing what act actually was commited. And it's the type of act that is basis for the judgement.
Now how do you know that it was murder in the first place, could have been manslaughter. One is more serious act than the other, the result is though the same. But that is also tru with an accident where one is killed.
Motive is never the cause, but if I have a motive it's more likely to be a murder than a manslaughter. That is why motive is important, it's all about how to judge the one commiting the crime.
But a man slauther att the sidewalk or in a home should be no difference, neither should there be a difference between a murder on the street or in a home. But there is a difference between murder, and manslughter. A murderer is also less likely to regret his acts, or to confess his acts, it's all planned usually also planed not to get caught.
A manslaughter does not plan, he acts at the specific moment, his not a murderer but has becom guilty of a crime "in the heat of that moment". Which he might not have committed if given time to calm down. The second scenario should be subject to consideration of the type of judgement brought upon him or her. While a murderer should be shown less flexibility in form of judgement. The second could be in consideration of mental health care under controlled forms and in some situations that could be enough, especially if the convict is willing to serv any time given him (which is a sign of great regret and understanding of the severity of his or her commited crime).
There is no reason to keep a person who wont act similary again in a prison, as long as it can be confirmed that he or she most likely wont. An other murderer might not regret, or understand the severity of his crime, or he might not subject to the laws willingly. There are little need for showing flexibilty or mercy on such a criminal.
Motive is very important to know in these situation. But you might have a motive but still be innosent of a crime. Same goes for intention, but if someone have intention, that it selfe should call for judicial actions, of proactive kind.
If I had the intention to kill John Doe, but didn't kill him someone else was first, I still should receive some judgement, ofcource it should be on an idividual base, of proactive care to change my ways.
It's not only in the persons own intrests it's in the intrests of the community. To lock in person in prisons, who might not need to be there is very innefective and costly. If such a person can get care to fix his inclanation then he or she is useful to the community.
Now again if your name was John Doe it was not you.
didn't he say he didnt care about motive, intent and motive are not the same.
I can have a motive to kill John Doe, but I don't have the intent to. Motive motivates, it does not cause or act, and it's lesser than the intention. I could have the intention to kill John Doe, it has still not caused me to but will if given the chance.
The chance is also subjected to variables. Could be at every or any chance. Or at the chance where getting caught is minimized. Which is also subjected to vary. As there might be different levels of aceptable chance of getting cought.
Disclaimer:
Now this was just to describe, if your name happen to be John Doe it's not you that is mentioned.
Revenge can be motivated by love atctually, the love for the one suffering from a crime. But a revange is still a crime, if not legally a crime it's morally.
Those who confess to crhistianty should know this, "-the revenge is mine", not yours, not even the one suffering from a crime should revenge. Musslims are more close to the ancient Jewish system where ther revenge belonged to the family of the one suffering from a crime, though the modern musslim way is nowhere near the orign, where the one guilty was punished, but now usually the victim is punished especially if it happend to be a woman.
And for those who are non belivers or atheists, well the teaching of moral which our laws base on; have their orign in different religions. The western way has it origns in the chistian teachings. Some base their laws on Islam, and other base them on some other religion.
So religion has had a key role in the laws made, and in teaching a sertain amount of moral knowledge. And before someone says the western way is based on Roman right. Rome chose "christianity" as their state church, today known as the catholic church... church of Rome. I dont say I agree with their teachings or the others mentioned. But they still have played their role in forming modern law systems like it or not, but it's a fact.
Even the modern state of Israel is "thanks to" or "due to" the Christian belives that where strong during that time period. Israel would not have existed today if it where not due to Christianity. And many christian bodies still belive that Israel is where Jesus will appear in his second coming. This was the forse behind forming a modern Israel. Where christian leaders agreed on forming an new state of Israel, sort of "helping Jesus in his works". Their methods where not that "chirstian" but still we can recognise the force religion has had on politics and still have.
This became a bit oftopic, but I hope I brought some perspective into the diskussion. Sertanaly a crime is a crime, wheter it was hate or love or any other motive.
Motive as I mentioned earlier only is a way of meassuring type of deed from the one comitting a crime, was it a murder, manslaughter or an accident. An accident is actually usually not a crime, though it's results are no less severe. Aslo different judgments are made on depending on if it was a murder or an manslaughter. (I hope the words have the same meaning as in my native language*).
*)Murder, an planed act of killing a fellowman, manslaugher an unplanned act of killing a fellowman ("in the heat of the moment").
No, the first is not a murder, the second is.
An kill in an accident, is an accident, the result is just as severe as in the case of the murderer, but the cause is way different. Motive is usually also used as a key to find if it was a murder, manslaughter (sounds bad in english dråp in swedish) or accident. Mostly between the first two.
If I have a motive to kill someone it's more likely that I commit a murder and not manslaughter. The result is the same of the both, howerver calls for different judgement as the first one of them is rawer then the second, a planed act versus an impulsive act, 'that might have been provoked'. Murdere could also be provoked but is more sever as the one in act has had time to calm down and rethink his actions.
But it does not mather where the crime happens, if it's at the sidewalk, on a cargo ship in the middle of pacific ocean or in the mountains, or desert of nevada.
So place and time of the act should not matter, but motive, way of action with other variables are still very important features to consider. But a crime is a crime, no need to give specail names to crimes done on different locations.
Ok maybe I'm missinformed, but here is the finnish law, and it includes wireless networking, including the mobile network.
law in finnish: http://www.finlex.fi/fi/laki/ajantasa/2003/20030393
law in swedish:
http://www.finlex.fi/sv/laki/ajantasa/2003/20030393
Basically the law says if ur a major telekomunication company your forced to rent your bandwidth.
If your a small local company, this law will not apply.
Well, while on the nokia, Ovi and other sources of app, sucked. I had to use hours to find the applications I wanted, I had to google every featrure i wanted for symbian s60. And most of the time the applications where totally crap.
Under iOS i go to Appstore, search for the feature I want, read the reviews and decide which one of them to opt for. Faster, better, and freekingly much simpler.
The freedome here is that iOS devices is not a monopoly, you can opt for the IMO infernor options like Nokia, or Android. You have all the freedom you need. Appstore is good because it forces developers to one distribution model, that is the absolut best thing with it. Then the censor ship can be argued.
The kindle is better book "reader" yes, but the iPad is a better whatever "reader".
Why I would opt for the ipad, over kindle.
I'm much freer on Apple DRM iphone4 than I ever was on the open Nokia I had.
I have come to the conclution freedom has to be governed, otherwice freedom will close it self up. Perfect exaple of this is the mobile market in USA. The American way is the liberal way, however, my mobile is much freer in Finland an many other countries due to the fact that there are governing laws on how competition is allowed to act.
In my homecountry Finland, GMS and NMT mobiles where never allowed to be sold with a carrier plan. Result was that carriers didn't have huge stocks of phones in their shops. Yes they had some phones, but most people piced up their phone at a regular store or electronics store. Then they opted for their carrier.
The law was reviwed to boost 3G development, now the carriers are allowed to sell phones with contract and even lock the phone to it. However, no carrier is allowed to build their own antennas in an area where there allready exists an antenna. Eeach carrier can compete on bringing the anntenna first to an area, but are forced to rent the bandwith to competitors. And that is freedom for everyone. The consumer and the carrier.
A reslut of that is that new carriers have turned up, who have no network them selves but rent from the bigger carriers. And yes they are competitive. No maintenance costs, and can bargine high network trafic prices with the network owners. It's again a win win situation.
But the market is not free as in free beer ala American market. And I've seen the same with the iOS products, yes they close me to Appstore, but infact that has been a positive thing for me as an consumer. And I argue that it generally has been a positive thing for developers, though there are exeptions.
But Nokia OVI sucks because the market is fragmented, and that is true for Androids also I experienced last week.
You know though that MPEG4 has roots in QuickTime4. Not that it's based on quicktime but Quicktime4 was the moddel they used as inspiration.
I don't know what priviegies Apple has due to that in the MPEG-LA group, but I'm quite sure they have some priviledges due to that relation ship.
Well, it will probably not save u from security issues. But save you from adobe sloppy coding security issues.
No, I hate flash when it's used for good thins too. Flash based hompages, they nasty to navigate, never complete and they are in Flash.
In fact if I want to view a product's hompage to learn about it, and it's only flash based I leave that page and wont buy the product. Not in America where test and return if not good is the paradigm. Where I live the sentence not good enough for me isn't a legal reson to return a product. They vill refuse taking it back, if good they give me the option to buy an other product from them for the same money, refound is non existing.
I have developed a quality tool for my self. If online product sheet is only availabe in flash, the product will suck in 9 out of 9.1 cases. "Pun inteded".
I've also have had problems with flash on such a simple flash page as Google maps. Number one reason to buy an iPhone over an Andriod is that by buying iPhone I'm part of creating a market that is flash free. If that market is attraktive market for content creators, including advertising, that market will one day kill Flash.
I support that fully, got my iphone 4, had nokia with flash block earlier, my wife had bothe 3g and 3gs before i had an iphone. Well it turns out I doo more with an non flash phone like iPhone than on a flash enabled.
It's a win win situation. I get more, I have a flash free experiece, and I'm actively part of killing Flash. I'm happy.
Instead of banning your students from reading refence materials during the tests, encourage them to.
I personally had test's where the teachers have allowed the students to bring any materials with them. In my opinnion this is the correct aproach. However it requires of you as a lector to reform your tests acordingly. Instead of testing their memory capabilities of memorating anything you might have taught them, you need to start testing their problem solving capabilities.
I remember very well one physics test I had, I got a 5 out of 5 possible, scale 0-5. I didn't know the formulas to use, and didn't trust the formulas i had was the correct one to use. But I solved the problem, by drawing some triangles and calculating forses with them instead. My teacher was amused, and watched me doing the calculations. I was the last one to still sit down doing the test, and time was running out, got nervous, last triangle to draw and last force calculation to calculate, and i had a minute left. Due to the stress I constantly drawed the triangle wrongly, erased it and drawed again, same results that i knew was wrong, erased. The lecturer was watching and calculated on his calculator, laughed and watched me doing the triangle wrong way again. Then he said, "No, not that way".
That sentece opend my mind, I drew the triangle correctly made the calculation and handed in the paper, a few seconds late. It was 1 of 5 or 6 problems to solve in that test. Got 5 out of 5. Later the teacher said, that he liked the way I solved the problem, it's not about knowing the correct formula to use or knowing how to use the formulas. But understanding the problem.
With this I just wanted to say, make your tests in such way that it forces the students to understand the problem, if they do understand the problem let them use any means they can to solve it. In this way your students will be better equipeed after the exams, than those who have memorized methods for the tests but have no clue of the inner workings of the matters. These studenst who have memorized for the tests, will always perform at the test. But try them once more 6-12 months later on same subject, and they fail.
Make your test in such way and you won't have to trouble your mind on what gadgets they happen to use at the tests, you wont even need to monitor the tests that much, except from them cheating by looking over an others shoulder.
An other thing you need to consider is time usage, how much time can you allow your studenst to use in solving the problem, ofcoruse not so much that they could take an online course on the matter while doing the test. But enought to find fromulas and guidance on how to use them.
It puts you in the situation that you need to carefully consider the construction of your tests, but it will reward you with good students, and intresting test material to review.
All fine as long as they dont start to think like windows, Windows has detected new hardware, installing new hardware.
Anyone not beliving in what Steve Jobs said was true?
Well anyway I've nerver liked Flas since it's release. And i have serveral times refused the installation of it. ATM I refuse installing Flash 10 separately.
Flash has alwaysed been bad, wheter it's om my Work Windows PC or my home Mac, it simply sux. Further more Flash can hijack webpages totally, by allowing to scale it's window and even scale to full screen.
I simply hate Flash!