The article makes it sound like it's difficult to find prior art yet the guy was just using the features in JS that some else put there. This is like buying a shovel and then patenting using a shovel to dig holes; what the hell does the PO think the shovel/JS was made for? How much better prior art can there be than the fact that he's just doing what it was designed for?!!?"!@@AAS#~goddamnpatentoffficeWeHatesssItFOR EVERRRR.
But then I'm from a part of Scotland (Aberdeen) that has never spoken Gaelic.
As far as I remember the whole of the proto-UK once spoke Gaelic in its earlier form of Celtic so unless you're claiming to be descended from the Picts (even then some people think the Picts ended up speaking a form of Celtic) I think that you almost certainly do live in an ex-Gaelic area, if you accept that Gaelic~=Celtic. Of course, it is hard to be sure, given the number of various tribes and peoples that invaded every part of the islands pre-1066 (when William "The Bastard" Blunkett introduced his new "get tough" immigration policy).
So your example of destruction of culture is a Snickers candybar?
Why does everyone want to talk about the "candy bar" and ignore the Euro? I did say the Snicker example (which wasn't particularly good, no) was tiny. Tiny
The name used to describe an American chocolate bar is part of British Culture?
You are avoiding the issue: something which was different in the UK was changed because it was different. The Euro is the same principle writ large.
Is Scotland any less Scottish because it is part of the UK?
I don't know; how is your Gaelic?
Feel free to oppose the EU on anti-capitalist grounds, but complaining about loss of culture is just bogus.
I'm flexible: I can object on both grounds. It is capitalism to which culture is sacrificed.
It's probably done alot for businiesses near you, but as a left-wing anarchist you've probably got little time for people who try to better themselves through the system.
Yes, I'd rather we bettered the system through people.
Seriously, I don't think it's all bad but I do think it's getting worse through the constant and corrupting pressure from the wannabe-Enrons of this world. Every time something like patents or copyright comes up we see Bill Gates and the like jetting in for meetings. Where's our meetings? We can send petitions and write up our ideas about things but in the end money talks. If a country the size of India can be pushed around by the WTO/WB what chance have the people of a small part of the EU?
Something smaller is needed; something where the leaders feel the breath of the people on the back of their necks more than they smell the money of their "friends" in their wallets.
Well, that's two slogans in one posting, quite enough for now.
Leon Britten (note the spelling) hasn't been an EU commissioner since Chris Patten took his place about five years ago,
He then became Vice President of the European Commission until earlier this year. What the slimy little toad is doing now I'm not sure but it is bound to be: a) Paid for by taxpayers, and b) unaccountable and powerful, his favourate combination.
The argument that closer EU integration will destroy national cultures is completely bogus and introspective.
But that's the intent of closer EU integration. It's not needed for any other reason. Cultural differences are seen as bad for business (tiny example: Snickers. Printing wrappers specially for the UK was not efficent, therefor the name was brought into line. The exact same reasoning brought in the Euro, from tiny items like sweet wrappers to huge issues of national power the same philosophy powers all EU thinking: make life easier for big business, don't worry about anyone else).
It's also a viewpoint most vehemently held by xenophobic right-wing little Engerlanders.
I'm an anarchic left-wing Norn Irish that thinks we should encourage cultural diversity, so you're a bit off there.
The current organisation of the EU may be seriously flawed, but that doesn't make the concept bad.
Why? What evidence do you have that a sprawling organisation set up for the purpose of increasing the power of businesses can possibly ever work for the benefit of ordinary people? The whole system is designed from the ground up to reduce the input of voters and increase the input of business. What's good about that concept?
What does the EU actually do for us? Sod all apart from the ability to buy lots of things made by Chinese prisoners. It costs us money, it wastes money, it does nothing we couldn't do for ourselves, including happily trading with other countries. It is time that the whole thing was junked and the fat bastards that run it were turned out to get real jobs. You know, ones where you have to actually know something about the job instead of just being handed it for doing what you're told.
I can't imagine! Why would anyone bother deciding who gets next year's bribes? Is suppose it spreads the money around a bit and gives everyone a chance at the trough, although I do think it's about time Brittan and Kinnock got their snouts out; how long have they been their now?
And what's this EU symbol doing on my driving licence?
Its reminding you that you are owned by corporate interests and can forget about the right to have your own country with your own democratic system and laws that reflect your culture (which is just as well since it'll probably soon be illegal to have your own culture and be in the EU at the same time).
One person: one vote; one million euros: one million votes.
Don't you know we're all supposed to be pretending there's a "peace process" going on? Next thing you'll be saying that little Jimmy's kneecaps didn't just "fall off" like the nice politician said.
RMS won't talk to anyone unless they pretend Linux is a GNU project. I can't find words to express my contempt for this sort of student-union political claptrap/humbug. If I write some code using MS Visual C++ does that mean I have to prefix "Microsoft" to the name of the program? If not, then why do I have to add "GNU" if I use gcc? RMS really should fuck off and leave the Free Software movement to get on with its very important work without his idiotic posturing.
I understand that you send all your paper mail through the post office as post cards. Right?
I think his point is that if you know that some of your mail is being opened then there's little point in sending anything you want kept private even in a proper envelope.
Perhaps the biggest problem with a religious theocracy is the fact that nearly half the population will not be represented by the government.
But that's true of a democracy too, especially when there are more than two parties.
If the majority of Iraqis want a theocracy, should they be denied? Isn't that un-democratic?
Part of the problem here is that there are a lot of people that simply can't imagine that someone would freely choose not to have democracy. But such people exist in droves.
But the day a relatively mild book like this is censored in the U.S. as a result of direct government intervention will be an interesting day indeed.
Ah, but what is "direct"? No one is saying that Bush (or Blair, or Clinton) phoned the publishers and said "don't print that". But when Dan Rather says "[There is] a fear that keeps journalists from asking the tough questions...one finds oneself saying 'I know the right question, but you know what, this is not exactly the right time to ask it'" you know something is wrong somewhere. Some stories just don't get airtime, and it isn't always based on the public interest.
My suggestion is: buy the UK edition via Amazon and borrow the US one from the library and have a look see; I'm going to do the inverse.
Hillary Rosen is writing IP laws while Robert Zoellick is put in charge of a World Trade Organisation in Mexico, according to this Department of State PR.
Zoellick is a former advisor to Enron.
Colin Powell is reported in a later PR to have said "that power usually comes responsibility and some level of
respect and some level of resentment -- my three R's. Hey, write that
down." (Laughter.)
Presumably the laughter was coming from Mr Joe "I wasn't responsible" Zoellick's end of the table.
You mean the IRAN backed shiites that want to install, you guessed it, an IRANIAN style government?
Yeah, that's right: Iran's organising the shiites. I assume they're using messenger pidgeons since there's no telephone system, either land or mobile and the place is crawling with US troops.
Maybe we would like a country with less tolerance for terrorist organizations between Syria and Iran?
Probably best to stop prevoking them and making it easy for them to recruit supporters. While you're at it perhaps you'd like to ask Mr Bush why he blocked the investigations that would have prevented 9/11 (by accident, I admit. Bush was so worried about helping his business friends that he didn't consider that the FBI's warnings about a big immediate threat to the WTC might be more important).
Maybe we'd like to see a succesfull democracy between Syria, Iran, and Saudi Arabia?
If by "we" you mean the US government, then no that exactly what they don't want. What they want is a weak democracy that takes its orders from the likes of Hillary Rosen. When democracies don't make the right "free" choice then the current administration does what it did in Venezuela and gets its military attache to let the local rebels know that if the democractically elected (and popular) leader was to, say, drop down dead from having an extra hole in his head, that any new and non-elected government that lowered oil prices wouldn't have anything to worry about. He was only saved by a tip-off from his friends in OPEC.
You could also have a look at Pakistan for a model of the sort of "democracy" Bush supports: one man, one vote and the man is Gen Musharraf (holder of weapons of mass destruction, but these are nice weapons of mass destruction).
Isn't that what the Mid-East states fear the most?
Yes, but not in the way you mean. True democratic elections in almost all ME countries would lead to the current governments being toppled because of their pro-US policies.
Bush's idea of free elections is for people to decide which of his friends to vote for. The idea that an anti-US candidate will be allowed to run in Iraq is pure fantasy.
Slashdot Mirror
TWW
As far as I remember the whole of the proto-UK once spoke Gaelic in its earlier form of Celtic so unless you're claiming to be descended from the Picts (even then some people think the Picts ended up speaking a form of Celtic) I think that you almost certainly do live in an ex-Gaelic area, if you accept that Gaelic~=Celtic. Of course, it is hard to be sure, given the number of various tribes and peoples that invaded every part of the islands pre-1066 (when William "The Bastard" Blunkett introduced his new "get tough" immigration policy).
TWW
That's a great reason to allow your country's democracy to be destroyed.
TWW
Why does everyone want to talk about the "candy bar" and ignore the Euro? I did say the Snicker example (which wasn't particularly good, no) was tiny. Tiny
TWW
You are avoiding the issue: something which was different in the UK was changed because it was different. The Euro is the same principle writ large.
Is Scotland any less Scottish because it is part of the UK?
I don't know; how is your Gaelic?
Feel free to oppose the EU on anti-capitalist grounds, but complaining about loss of culture is just bogus.
I'm flexible: I can object on both grounds. It is capitalism to which culture is sacrificed.
It's probably done alot for businiesses near you, but as a left-wing anarchist you've probably got little time for people who try to better themselves through the system.
Yes, I'd rather we bettered the system through people.
Seriously, I don't think it's all bad but I do think it's getting worse through the constant and corrupting pressure from the wannabe-Enrons of this world. Every time something like patents or copyright comes up we see Bill Gates and the like jetting in for meetings. Where's our meetings? We can send petitions and write up our ideas about things but in the end money talks. If a country the size of India can be pushed around by the WTO/WB what chance have the people of a small part of the EU?
Something smaller is needed; something where the leaders feel the breath of the people on the back of their necks more than they smell the money of their "friends" in their wallets.
Well, that's two slogans in one posting, quite enough for now.
TWW
No, they're a report-for-hire firm. You want a pro-Linux bias, pay them for a pro-Linux bias. Makes no odds to them who's filling the bank account.
TWW
He then became Vice President of the European Commission until earlier this year. What the slimy little toad is doing now I'm not sure but it is bound to be: a) Paid for by taxpayers, and b) unaccountable and powerful, his favourate combination.
Plus, I'm pretty sure it's "Brittan".
TWW
But that's the intent of closer EU integration. It's not needed for any other reason. Cultural differences are seen as bad for business (tiny example: Snickers. Printing wrappers specially for the UK was not efficent, therefor the name was brought into line. The exact same reasoning brought in the Euro, from tiny items like sweet wrappers to huge issues of national power the same philosophy powers all EU thinking: make life easier for big business, don't worry about anyone else).
It's also a viewpoint most vehemently held by xenophobic right-wing little Engerlanders.
I'm an anarchic left-wing Norn Irish that thinks we should encourage cultural diversity, so you're a bit off there.
The current organisation of the EU may be seriously flawed, but that doesn't make the concept bad.
Why? What evidence do you have that a sprawling organisation set up for the purpose of increasing the power of businesses can possibly ever work for the benefit of ordinary people? The whole system is designed from the ground up to reduce the input of voters and increase the input of business. What's good about that concept?
What does the EU actually do for us? Sod all apart from the ability to buy lots of things made by Chinese prisoners. It costs us money, it wastes money, it does nothing we couldn't do for ourselves, including happily trading with other countries. It is time that the whole thing was junked and the fat bastards that run it were turned out to get real jobs. You know, ones where you have to actually know something about the job instead of just being handed it for doing what you're told.
TWW
I can't imagine! Why would anyone bother deciding who gets next year's bribes? Is suppose it spreads the money around a bit and gives everyone a chance at the trough, although I do think it's about time Brittan and Kinnock got their snouts out; how long have they been their now?
And what's this EU symbol doing on my driving licence?
Its reminding you that you are owned by corporate interests and can forget about the right to have your own country with your own democratic system and laws that reflect your culture (which is just as well since it'll probably soon be illegal to have your own culture and be in the EU at the same time).
One person: one vote; one million euros: one million votes.
TWW
TWW
Repeat it often enough and it'll become true? An OS is that code which controls your access to hardware. Everything else is applications, baby.
TWW
He was the root. Now he's just a spoilt jackass.
TWW
TWW
TWW
Read the books. Even as an adult they are still some of the most interestingly bizarre and often creepy stories I've got. Weird stuff.
TWW
I'd never noticed that before, but I'm pretty sure that Jack offer(ed?) the contents of the (last one I ever bought) 5.25 floppy on his website.
TWW
I think his point is that if you know that some of your mail is being opened then there's little point in sending anything you want kept private even in a proper envelope.
TWW
What about SWAT (http://localhost:901)? Is that not installed by default?
TWW
TWW
I've not finished it yet but the former is the one that's been cited so far as a reason for pulling one part about Bush and goldmines.
TWW
But that's true of a democracy too, especially when there are more than two parties.
If the majority of Iraqis want a theocracy, should they be denied? Isn't that un-democratic?
Part of the problem here is that there are a lot of people that simply can't imagine that someone would freely choose not to have democracy. But such people exist in droves.
TWW
Ah, but what is "direct"? No one is saying that Bush (or Blair, or Clinton) phoned the publishers and said "don't print that". But when Dan Rather says "[There is] a fear that keeps journalists from asking the tough questions...one finds oneself saying 'I know the right question, but you know what, this is not exactly the right time to ask it'" you know something is wrong somewhere. Some stories just don't get airtime, and it isn't always based on the public interest.
My suggestion is: buy the UK edition via Amazon and borrow the US one from the library and have a look see; I'm going to do the inverse.
TWW
Zoellick is a former advisor to Enron.
Colin Powell is reported in a later PR to have said "that power usually comes responsibility and some level of respect and some level of resentment -- my three R's. Hey, write that down." (Laughter.)
Presumably the laughter was coming from Mr Joe "I wasn't responsible" Zoellick's end of the table.
TWW
Obviously false statement. Duh.
I checked and it seems that the US and UK versions are not the same but there is a US version.
TWW
Yeah, that's right: Iran's organising the shiites. I assume they're using messenger pidgeons since there's no telephone system, either land or mobile and the place is crawling with US troops.
Maybe we would like a country with less tolerance for terrorist organizations between Syria and Iran?
Probably best to stop prevoking them and making it easy for them to recruit supporters. While you're at it perhaps you'd like to ask Mr Bush why he blocked the investigations that would have prevented 9/11 (by accident, I admit. Bush was so worried about helping his business friends that he didn't consider that the FBI's warnings about a big immediate threat to the WTC might be more important).
Maybe we'd like to see a succesfull democracy between Syria, Iran, and Saudi Arabia?
If by "we" you mean the US government, then no that exactly what they don't want. What they want is a weak democracy that takes its orders from the likes of Hillary Rosen. When democracies don't make the right "free" choice then the current administration does what it did in Venezuela and gets its military attache to let the local rebels know that if the democractically elected (and popular) leader was to, say, drop down dead from having an extra hole in his head, that any new and non-elected government that lowered oil prices wouldn't have anything to worry about. He was only saved by a tip-off from his friends in OPEC.
You could also have a look at Pakistan for a model of the sort of "democracy" Bush supports: one man, one vote and the man is Gen Musharraf (holder of weapons of mass destruction, but these are nice weapons of mass destruction).
Isn't that what the Mid-East states fear the most?
Yes, but not in the way you mean. True democratic elections in almost all ME countries would lead to the current governments being toppled because of their pro-US policies.
Bush's idea of free elections is for people to decide which of his friends to vote for. The idea that an anti-US candidate will be allowed to run in Iraq is pure fantasy.
TWW