Only if someone tries to reach you the phone which last registered with a GSM tower, wins. Might get interesting if both phones are moving around and are constantly re-registering:)
I always wished for such a small form factor portable computer as a means to console into some big iron. Since Psion is no longer with us, there was no such thing.
P2P means that both ends of a communication can initiate and end the communication (so they are peers and communicate peer to peer).
Lets have a look what P2P services we have:
- DNS - SMTP-Agents like sendmail or qmail or procmail or MS Exchange - BGP - Any chats with client to client communication (as in IRC's DCC). - MS Windows shared ressources (Hey! Windows for Workgroups was advertised as bringing P2P to the business world!) - UNIX services (any UNIX machine can be provider or consumer of UNIX services) - IPsec...
IP itself is peer to peer. To get a client/server model running on IP you have to define higher level protocols (mostly based on the TCP stack).
If ACTA ever becomes law you can sue every company that somehow uses the internet or provides internet based services or gear for the internet out of existance. Cisco, Verizon, IBM, Microsoft... be very afraid of ACTA!
I believe surveillance, when universal, and when the feeds are available to all, can be an extremely good thing. This essentially emulates small town life, but with the benefit that you have so many people out there, that odds are excellent that you're going to find lots of other people engaging in your behavior, and even better, people will see the context in which your behavior is marinating. I don't like small towns for exactly that reason.
The report says, that already calls to Help Lines have dropped, because people don't call numbers they consider monitored by other people. In the end we might have more suicides and more drug related crimes because the prevention tools are based on trust, and the trust is no longer there.
Small Towns have one little advantage compared with universal surveillance: You can flee them.
The Euro as a currency has existed much longer. It was called Ecu before (pronounced french, because there once was a french currency called Ecu, but in fact the abbreviation of European Currency Unit). The name Euro was coined in the Contract of Maastricht 1992.
It's just since 1999 that it was allowed to publish the balance sheet in Euro.
They play for time, implement the depreceated ODF 1.1, thus are "standards compliant" and count on the several flaws within ODF 1.1 to taint ODF's stance with gouvernment officials, which in turn will be still using.doc/docx for information interchange. Thus Microsoft gets the time to mend OOXML to agree with their actual document format.
Enter MS and OOXML, a document standard that has now been validated by and internationally accepted ISO review procedure. But Morten Kjærsgaard begs to differ: 1.) There is no validated standard right now, for that the final draft had to be published and sent to the members by March 29 2008. This deadline is missed, so the DIS29500 is not official yet and thus cannot be accepted yet. 2.) For a standard to get fast tracked, there has to be an implementation. Because even Microsoft will not support OOXML for at least a year, OOXML couldn't be fast tracked to begin with, and the votes in the different comitees were votes about nil, but not about a fast tracked standard.
With regular trains reaching 575 km/h (357 mph) and the world record for MagLevs being 581 km/h (361 mph), there is really no difference in speed for both technologies.
The company's full name was Software- und System-Entwicklungsgesellschaft (Software and System Development Society), and S.u.S.E. is just the abbreviation. I don't see anything wrong with that.
If its an applet, heck, I have no idea. Applets were a bad design by java, and were then blown out of the water by Flash and pretty much abandoned. Applets never work right, I would stay away from that technology. I am managing some type of equipment whose web frontend makes heavy use of Java Applets. Unfortunately, the oldest equipment variantes run happily with Java 1.3, but have issues with higher versions. Newer variants require the newer JREs, and fail on the old ones. For that we have the "Java Switcher", which changes the JRE before launching the webbrowser (which has to be Internet Explorer though, otherwise we run into other issues. Luckily IE 5.5, IE 6.0 and IE 7.0 work on all types).
The problem with the concept of intellectual property is, that the term doesn't have any boundaries. Property has very well defined boundaries: The real estate boundaries are drawn down in maps, the house has a wall, the car has a tangible surface.
Everything intellectual is missing exactly those boundaries that separate the "owned" part from the "not owned" part. Mark Twain once told the local parish: "Your sermon today was magnificent, but at home I have a book that contains every word of it." The priest was offended, until he saw the book: a dictionary.
So what is the "owned" part in that sermon? The words are not. The sequence of words maybe? It surely contains lots of quotes from the Bible, so those quotes are not owned either. Many of the sentences have been told by other people too. Many of the conclusions were drawn by other theologists. The priest might have used the book of a philosopher or theologist as inspiration. So those parts are not owned either. What is owned is at maximum a certain individuality, of which we aren't even able to tell which part is just random chance and which part is the actual work of the intellect.
So in every piece of intellectual works we have layers and layers laid upon each other which are not owned by the intellect who created the work. 99% of every work is in fact owned by others. That's the famous sentence in the correspondence of Newton and Hooke: "If I've seen further than others, it's because I was standing on the shoulders of giants" (which itself is just a quote of a quote of a quote).
On the other hand intellectual creation is larger as the work itself (you could call it 'greedy' in the regular expressions sense). It doesn't just put well defined building blocks together. It redefines the building blocks themselves. A word once used in a famous quote will always have the connotation of this quote attached. So somehow this word is not fully in the public domain anymore, it has now an individual character thanks to the intellect using it. Case in point: No nerd will ever be able to use the number 42 anymore without having some Douglas Adams associations. So somehow the once public 42 is partly owned by Douglas Adams' intellect, even though he never invented the 42, and 42 is definitely not his work.
So there is no definable property in the intellectual work, because property is a way to define boundaries: Here is yours, and here starts mine. Intellectual works are missing exactly those dichotomy between yours and mine. Intellectual works are "blurred in the property space".
No, it is in the hand of the government (who signed the treaty) to decide who is allowed to use it. The U.S. obviously decided in a charter to give the rights to use it to A.R.C..
With the Bundeswehr it is simple. There the Iron Cross is a Hoheitszeichen (national emblem), so it's impossible (e.g. forbidden by law) to use it as a logo anyway, at least in Germany.
As I understood, the situation is different. The Red Cross logo is owned by Red Cross, and J&J has a license to use it on their products which costs J&J 5 ct per item sold.
And now Red Cross is licensing the logo to other companies with similar deals, thus ending J&J exclusivity, but not diluting any trademarks J&J was owning. If the license deal didn't had any wording about exclusivity, then I don't see J&J having a case, and obviously the judges didn't see any case either.
The british invasion in Ireland led by Oliver Cromwell was puritan-evangelical motivated and has cost the life of an estimated 300,000 of irish people (among them 12,000 catholic priests). So the Inquisition, which lasted at least 400 years, was pretty tame compared with that.
The Inquisition was something very else than "coercion of the worst kind". It was more or less created to regulate and moderate the "coercion of the worst kind" that was happening anyway. Burning a witch on a stake was happening everywhere in the late Middle Age Europe, and to avoid this going out of hand the Inquisition was created to actually look into the matters before handing down a verdict.
Even Bernard Gui of "the Name of the Rose" fame was not the sinistre hunter of witches and heretics as portrayed in the movie and the novel. Of the more than 100 inquisitions he made during his career, about 40% of them ended with acquittal, another 30% with little penalties (for middle age ideas of "just punishment") like paying a fee or a whipping. About 30% were actually found guilty of heresy and thus sentenced to death.
Given that he was prosecutor and judge in one person this is a pretty gentle record.
Differently than that countries without the Roman Inquisition had a much worse record. There were german towns in the 17. century which lost half of their population due to witchhunts and neighbours blaming each other of practising Dark Arts and heresy and the local authorities handing out death sentences fast and before they were accused of heresy themselves.
So only the final monster to slay^W^W^W audit to pay for full points? For some reasons the Scientology ideology reminds me of a lifelong session of Giana Sisters or Super Mario Bros.
What happens if you get to the final level? Are there any cheats or secret chambers to collect additional Thetan points?
Slashdot Mirror
Only if someone tries to reach you the phone which last registered with a GSM tower, wins. Might get interesting if both phones are moving around and are constantly re-registering :)
I always wished for such a small form factor portable computer as a means to console into some big iron. Since Psion is no longer with us, there was no such thing.
DNS itself ist P2P.
...
P2P means that both ends of a communication can initiate and end the communication (so they are peers and communicate peer to peer).
Lets have a look what P2P services we have:
- DNS
- SMTP-Agents like sendmail or qmail or procmail or MS Exchange
- BGP
- Any chats with client to client communication (as in IRC's DCC).
- MS Windows shared ressources (Hey! Windows for Workgroups was advertised as bringing P2P to the business world!)
- UNIX services (any UNIX machine can be provider or consumer of UNIX services)
- IPsec
IP itself is peer to peer. To get a client/server model running on IP you have to define higher level protocols (mostly based on the TCP stack).
If ACTA ever becomes law you can sue every company that somehow uses the internet or provides internet based services or gear for the internet out of existance. Cisco, Verizon, IBM, Microsoft... be very afraid of ACTA!
There is hard evidence to support the survey: Calls to Help Lines have dropped since the data retention has started.
The report says, that already calls to Help Lines have dropped, because people don't call numbers they consider monitored by other people. In the end we might have more suicides and more drug related crimes because the prevention tools are based on trust, and the trust is no longer there.
Small Towns have one little advantage compared with universal surveillance: You can flee them.
You could even buy OEM licenses, because the First Sale Doctrin applies also on computer programs in Europe.
A as in Austria (Vienna is the capital of Austria after all, and it's now 90 years ago that Croatia is no part of Austria anymore)?
The Euro as a currency has existed much longer. It was called Ecu before (pronounced french, because there once was a french currency called Ecu, but in fact the abbreviation of European Currency Unit). The name Euro was coined in the Contract of Maastricht 1992.
It's just since 1999 that it was allowed to publish the balance sheet in Euro.
It's very easy to separate:
If you can interact with it, it's an application. If another computer can interact with it, it's an application.
The OS's purpose is to administrate the computer's ressources and manage the application's access to the ressources.
I would wager 3.)
.doc/docx for information interchange. Thus Microsoft gets the time to mend OOXML to agree with their actual document format.
They play for time, implement the depreceated ODF 1.1, thus are "standards compliant" and count on the several flaws within ODF 1.1 to taint ODF's stance with gouvernment officials, which in turn will be still using
1.) There is no validated standard right now, for that the final draft had to be published and sent to the members by March 29 2008. This deadline is missed, so the DIS29500 is not official yet and thus cannot be accepted yet.
2.) For a standard to get fast tracked, there has to be an implementation. Because even Microsoft will not support OOXML for at least a year, OOXML couldn't be fast tracked to begin with, and the votes in the different comitees were votes about nil, but not about a fast tracked standard.
Probably modified to Elonex' specs.
With regular trains reaching 575 km/h (357 mph) and the world record for MagLevs being 581 km/h (361 mph), there is really no difference in speed for both technologies.
Nothing. I just didn't understand fm6's allegation, that changing SuSE to SUSE somehow was a sign to "be grownup".
SuSE was the acronym for the company which distributed SuSE Linux. I don't see any childish behaviour there.
What was wrong with SuSE?
The company's full name was Software- und System-Entwicklungsgesellschaft (Software and System Development Society), and S.u.S.E. is just the abbreviation. I don't see anything wrong with that.
The problem with the concept of intellectual property is, that the term doesn't have any boundaries. Property has very well defined boundaries: The real estate boundaries are drawn down in maps, the house has a wall, the car has a tangible surface.
Everything intellectual is missing exactly those boundaries that separate the "owned" part from the "not owned" part. Mark Twain once told the local parish: "Your sermon today was magnificent, but at home I have a book that contains every word of it." The priest was offended, until he saw the book: a dictionary.
So what is the "owned" part in that sermon? The words are not. The sequence of words maybe? It surely contains lots of quotes from the Bible, so those quotes are not owned either. Many of the sentences have been told by other people too. Many of the conclusions were drawn by other theologists. The priest might have used the book of a philosopher or theologist as inspiration. So those parts are not owned either. What is owned is at maximum a certain individuality, of which we aren't even able to tell which part is just random chance and which part is the actual work of the intellect.
So in every piece of intellectual works we have layers and layers laid upon each other which are not owned by the intellect who created the work. 99% of every work is in fact owned by others. That's the famous sentence in the correspondence of Newton and Hooke: "If I've seen further than others, it's because I was standing on the shoulders of giants" (which itself is just a quote of a quote of a quote).
On the other hand intellectual creation is larger as the work itself (you could call it 'greedy' in the regular expressions sense). It doesn't just put well defined building blocks together. It redefines the building blocks themselves. A word once used in a famous quote will always have the connotation of this quote attached. So somehow this word is not fully in the public domain anymore, it has now an individual character thanks to the intellect using it. Case in point: No nerd will ever be able to use the number 42 anymore without having some Douglas Adams associations. So somehow the once public 42 is partly owned by Douglas Adams' intellect, even though he never invented the 42, and 42 is definitely not his work.
So there is no definable property in the intellectual work, because property is a way to define boundaries: Here is yours, and here starts mine. Intellectual works are missing exactly those dichotomy between yours and mine. Intellectual works are "blurred in the property space".
So I don't think the concept of
No, it is in the hand of the government (who signed the treaty) to decide who is allowed to use it. The U.S. obviously decided in a charter to give the rights to use it to A.R.C..
With the Bundeswehr it is simple. There the Iron Cross is a Hoheitszeichen (national emblem), so it's impossible (e.g. forbidden by law) to use it as a logo anyway, at least in Germany.
As I understood, the situation is different. The Red Cross logo is owned by Red Cross, and J&J has a license to use it on their products which costs J&J 5 ct per item sold.
And now Red Cross is licensing the logo to other companies with similar deals, thus ending J&J exclusivity, but not diluting any trademarks J&J was owning. If the license deal didn't had any wording about exclusivity, then I don't see J&J having a case, and obviously the judges didn't see any case either.
Luckily the mountain tops in the Zillertal valley are far above 6000 ft, so no pesky trees growing there anymore :)
The british invasion in Ireland led by Oliver Cromwell was puritan-evangelical motivated and has cost the life of an estimated 300,000 of irish people (among them 12,000 catholic priests). So the Inquisition, which lasted at least 400 years, was pretty tame compared with that.
The Inquisition was something very else than "coercion of the worst kind". It was more or less created to regulate and moderate the "coercion of the worst kind" that was happening anyway. Burning a witch on a stake was happening everywhere in the late Middle Age Europe, and to avoid this going out of hand the Inquisition was created to actually look into the matters before handing down a verdict.
Even Bernard Gui of "the Name of the Rose" fame was not the sinistre hunter of witches and heretics as portrayed in the movie and the novel. Of the more than 100 inquisitions he made during his career, about 40% of them ended with acquittal, another 30% with little penalties (for middle age ideas of "just punishment") like paying a fee or a whipping. About 30% were actually found guilty of heresy and thus sentenced to death.
Given that he was prosecutor and judge in one person this is a pretty gentle record.
Differently than that countries without the Roman Inquisition had a much worse record. There were german towns in the 17. century which lost half of their population due to witchhunts and neighbours blaming each other of practising Dark Arts and heresy and the local authorities handing out death sentences fast and before they were accused of heresy themselves.
So only the final monster to slay^W^W^W audit to pay for full points? For some reasons the Scientology ideology reminds me of a lifelong session of Giana Sisters or Super Mario Bros.
What happens if you get to the final level? Are there any cheats or secret chambers to collect additional Thetan points?
Same in Germany. Google for "Microsoft" and "Snogard".