I've parsed and re-parsed the sentence in question; it appears to be quite grammatical. Which grammatical rule do you think it breaks?
I'll grant that it's not an easy read, and it could be rewritten, but this forum is sort of a cross between talking and writing. You redo your writing; you don't redo your talking unless people look at you strangely and say "What just came out of your mouth?"
Oh, I get it. When you're right, we all kowtow and proclaim you a genius, but when you're wrong, you get to say "Hey, I was just being silly" and we all go about our business? I don't think so!
"Look at the Brand X security system! It's based on unproven conjectures! But our ACME security system recently had one of our conjectures proven!
(Guy talking really fast) Not all ACME conjectures have been proven. Proven ACME conjecture has not yet been proven. Unproven ACME conjectures are unstated and may be 1+1=3 (which has not been proven)."
Unlike the teamsters, I can't see tech unions working with the mob to kill scabs, but that's just me.
Dude, you'd better be careful. I crossed a picket line once at a major ISP, and before I went on lunch, my name had been legally changed to Whee Ownjew, my medical history had been emailed to my girlfriend, and my picture was in every post office in the country, over a caption that said "WANTED! For Axe Murder!" By the time I got home, my bank account had a balance of 1.7 quadrillion dollars, and the bank's logfiles showed access to their mainframe from my IP address at work.
I am now living in Sumatra, trying to make a living troubleshooting thin ethernet cable plants.
Please remember, just because geeks won't kill you doesn't mean they can't take your life.
Fraud is a crime. You can prosecute it. You can sue cheaters in civil court. You can seize their computers. You can take lots of money away from them. You can make the lives of a few cheaters miserable and scare off a bunch more.
Train teachers better. Or, in other words, rework the teacher education curriculum, require education majors to meet higher standards, make them take more courses, attend more practicums, etc. This will make it harder to become a teacher. Intelligent people will say "Gee, I can follow this stringent, rigorous course of study and be paid $19,000 a year, or I can go into engineering and be paid $40,000 a year."
It's not enough to merely train teachers better. If you set the bar higher but don't pay teachers better, you will lose teachers.
Here's my plan:
Step 1: Double every teacher's salary
Step 2: Double the number of teachers
Step 3: Eliminate the dead wood.
Note that step three will likely require firing everyone who was a teacher before step 1.
There are very few exceptions to the old saw that states "Those who can, do. Those who can't, teach. And those who can't teach, teach teachers."
And to answer your question, no, the time I spent as a public school teacher didn't make me bitter or cynical at all.
Whoever this 'antiher0' person is, s|he has revealed this project perhaps a bit too soon....
Yup. Blame the person who publicized your WORLD-WIDE web site. It's their fault for telling everyone that you have a WORLD-WIDE web site. Heaven knows, if the link isn't publicized, it's impossible for anyone to get to your WORLD-WIDE web site.
If you don't want the whole world to see it, don't put it on the web...
My wish is that power management under Linux would be fully supported. Getting four hours battery life under Windows and two hours under Linux is disappointing.
INFIDEL! MISCREANT! Pustulent bootlicking LAPDOG of WILLIAM HENRY GATES III! Knowest thou not that the WRATH of the PENGUIN shall fall upon thee? May thy hard drive CHIP and SHATTER!
Those who would trade security and essential freedoms for a little power deserve not security, freedom, or power.
What sort of loser hacker are you? Just buy a bunch of AA batteries at the airport or K-mart or wherevery you are and solder them in series/parallel to meet your laptop's power specs. If you can't get it exactly, try combinations of NiCad and regular batteries, as the.3V differential helps to meet the odd voltage specs. Or just carry around a few car batteries, a 12V cigarette lighter socket wired to some alligator clips, and one of those car adapters for your laptop.
Note that the iron oxide is merely a catalyst and controls the rate of the burn. A catalyst is a substance which is unchanged at the end of a chemical reaction.
You leave off the amounts involved, a most important factor. Note that the iron oxide is present in a relatively tiny amount.
From what I understand, intellectual property is usually undisclosed information, Then you understand nothing. Go to google and do a search for "intellectual property faq." Read
it. Don't post again until you have.
Once you've done that, go find the guy who moderated you up as "INSIGHTFUL" and force him to eat a hard copy of the FAQ.
No box is 100% secure. HOWEVER, if the software vendor has said "Do X or your box is insecure" then (I believe) YOU are liable if your box is cracked. You are not SOLELY liable; the crackers are liable too, but you should be treated as an accessory to their crime.
This is the most insightful comment on the page; I'm glad SOMEBODY gets what open source is about. Everybody else is hereby commanded to go read 'The Cathedral and the Bazaar'
Hydrogen burns clear EVERYTHING burns clear. Flames are superheated gasses; the air becomes so hot that it glows. Sort of like iron. When you suggest that hydrogen burns clear, you are either saying that it burns so coolly that the air 'glows' in the infrared, or it burns so hot that it 'glows' mostly in the X-Ray spectrum. Both are ridiculous propositions.
And to top it all off, I've burned hydrogen, and it DEFINITELY produces a flame...
Clean cars being one example. Yes, hydrogen-burning cars can be safe...because the hydrogen is dissolved in metal and it can't explode, and it is bled off continuously and dispersed.
You have been reading TOO much hydrogen car propoganda. Yes, hydrogen-powered cars can be good, but it is also true that hydrogen burns.Just like gasoline. Or diesel.
...and the reason you don't put water on gas fires is that gas floats, there's more total liquid, and you've effectively increased the surface area, making it burn more fiercely.
The idea that PROPRIETARY software should only be reused in PROPRIETARY software is attractive. But the viral nature of COPYRIGHT LAW means that a line of code that is copied from one project to another contaminates other code that might be used in a third project. That's the intent of COPYRIGHT LAW - to eventually encumber the entire PROPRIETARY software pool. To me, it's distasteful that a line or two of code ties the hands of developers who have written a huge project of their own and who may never have seen a line from the original COPYRIGHTED project.
WHY ARE YOU COPYING CODE IF YOU DON'T WANT TO BE ENCUMBERED BY SOMEONE ELSE'S LICENSE? If you don't like my license, DON'T USE MY CODE! Why is this so hard to understand?
Alice In Wonderland is in the public domain, else it wouldn't be a part of Project Guttenberg. Its redistribution cannot be limited in any way. This is not like the GPL, where if you disagree with the license (contract law) you can't make a copy of it (copyright law). If the permissions are to be considered a license, then simply refuse to accept it, and exercise your rights under copyright law to do whatever you want to do with the text.
KEEP IN MIND, HOWEVER that things like formatting, page layout, fonts, etc. CAN be copyrighted, independent of the underlying text, so don't go hog wild. Feel free, however, to read it aloud.
As a side note, let's suppose that the distributor decides to sue you. What are you going to do? They are clearly in the wrong, but can you afford to hire a lawyer to respond to all their briefs, arguments, and pleadings? Can you afford to defend yourself? Unless you're richer than me (and I make good money), you can't. They can't win, but you can't fight. Ergo, you lose.
This is why lawyers should be lined up and shot. Or at least kept out of legislative bodies.
Secondly I think that independent re-discovery of the technique should be an affirmative defense against patent infringement, that is, you can't patent a technique, keep it secret, and if then somebody else uses the same technique, suddenly surfaces with the patent and say "oh, here's our secret technique which we have patented, and this means you can't use it."
ESR is either being overly simplistic to make a point or he's ignorant of what a patent IS. You can't "patent a technique [and] keep it secret." A patent means that you make your invention a matter of PUBLIC RECORD. In return, you have a time-limited monopoly on the use of your invention. Because patenet information is available to everyone (legally speaking), you can't re-discover it, anymore than you can re-discover relativity. Sure, you could learn the same mathematics Einstein knew, start with his postulates, and proceed to the same conclusions, but NO ONE would suggest that you had re-discovered relativity.
Since patents are a matter of public record, it could become very difficult to sue someone for infringement. I could secretly research your patent. I could conduct a few months of phony research - perform experiments, build devices, and (most importantly) keep careful records. whatever. I could then 're-invent' your device, and I'd have the paperwork to show that it was independent. How would an outsider know that I had actually stolen it? How would you prove it? Yet stealing it is what I would have done.
I do agree that 'submarine' patents are bad; applications for patents should become immediately matters of public record.
Slashdot Mirror
Things that can make logic gates:
Vacuum tubes
Transistors
Relays
Streams of water
Ropes and pulleys
Brain cells
If you can create an intelligent out of semicondutors, then you can do it with a sufficiently complex plumbing system.
Fissure erupts, turns citizen into pillar of salt! Story at 11.
(so what's ksu's analogue to ku's kulua?)
I've parsed and re-parsed the sentence in question; it appears to be quite grammatical. Which grammatical rule do you think it breaks?
I'll grant that it's not an easy read, and it could be rewritten, but this forum is sort of a cross between talking and writing. You redo your writing; you don't redo your talking unless people look at you strangely and say "What just came out of your mouth?"
My experiment is to see what will happen when a liter of BBs are are released into low earth orbit by a CO2 cartridge nestled in their midst...
Oh, I get it. When you're right, we all kowtow and proclaim you a genius, but when you're wrong, you get to say "Hey, I was just being silly" and we all go about our business? I don't think so!
;)
(I'm being sarcastic too
This post translated into MarketSpeak:
"Look at the Brand X security system! It's based on unproven conjectures! But our ACME security system recently had one of our conjectures proven!
(Guy talking really fast) Not all ACME conjectures have been proven. Proven ACME conjecture has not yet been proven. Unproven ACME conjectures are unstated and may be 1+1=3 (which has not been proven)."
God spoke Hebrew. Jesus was a Jew. He had a Galilean accent.
Roman Catholicism ain't what it used to be.
Unlike the teamsters, I can't see tech unions working with the mob to kill scabs, but that's just me.
Dude, you'd better be careful. I crossed a picket line once at a major ISP, and before I went on lunch, my name had been legally changed to Whee Ownjew, my medical history had been emailed to my girlfriend, and my picture was in every post office in the country, over a caption that said "WANTED! For Axe Murder!" By the time I got home, my bank account had a balance of 1.7 quadrillion dollars, and the bank's logfiles showed access to their mainframe from my IP address at work.
I am now living in Sumatra, trying to make a living troubleshooting thin ethernet cable plants.
Please remember, just because geeks won't kill you doesn't mean they can't take your life.
Cheating for money = fraud
Fraud is a crime. You can prosecute it. You can sue cheaters in civil court. You can seize their computers. You can take lots of money away from them. You can make the lives of a few cheaters miserable and scare off a bunch more.
Two words:
ebay
google
Train teachers better.
Or, in other words, rework the teacher education curriculum, require education majors to meet higher standards, make them take more courses, attend more practicums, etc. This will make it harder to become a teacher. Intelligent people will say "Gee, I can follow this stringent, rigorous course of study and be paid $19,000 a year, or I can go into engineering and be paid $40,000 a year."
It's not enough to merely train teachers better. If you set the bar higher but don't pay teachers better, you will lose teachers.
Here's my plan:
Step 1: Double every teacher's salary
Step 2: Double the number of teachers
Step 3: Eliminate the dead wood.
Note that step three will likely require firing everyone who was a teacher before step 1.
There are very few exceptions to the old saw that states "Those who can, do. Those who can't, teach. And those who can't teach, teach teachers."
And to answer your question, no, the time I spent as a public school teacher didn't make me bitter or cynical at all.
Whoever this 'antiher0' person is, s|he has revealed this project perhaps a bit too soon....
Yup. Blame the person who publicized your WORLD-WIDE web site. It's their fault for telling everyone that you have a WORLD-WIDE web site. Heaven knows, if the link isn't publicized, it's impossible for anyone to get to your WORLD-WIDE web site.
If you don't want the whole world to see it, don't put it on the web...
My wish is that power management under Linux would be fully supported. Getting four hours battery life under Windows and two hours under Linux is disappointing.
.3V differential helps to meet the odd voltage specs. Or just carry around a few car batteries, a 12V cigarette lighter socket wired to some alligator clips, and one of those car adapters for your laptop.
INFIDEL! MISCREANT! Pustulent bootlicking LAPDOG of WILLIAM HENRY GATES III! Knowest thou not that the WRATH of the PENGUIN shall fall upon thee? May thy hard drive CHIP and SHATTER!
Those who would trade security and essential freedoms for a little power deserve not security, freedom, or power.
D00D! 11|\|UX R00lZ! J00 AR3 A 5UCK0R A|\|D 1 0\/\/|\| J00!
What sort of loser hacker are you? Just buy a bunch of AA batteries at the airport or K-mart or wherevery you are and solder them in series/parallel to meet your laptop's power specs. If you can't get it exactly, try combinations of NiCad and regular batteries, as the
OK, so I'm a week late; so sue me :)
Your information is accurate but incomplete.
Note that the iron oxide is merely a catalyst and controls the rate of the burn. A catalyst is a substance which is unchanged at the end of a chemical reaction.
You leave off the amounts involved, a most important factor. Note that the iron oxide is present in a relatively tiny amount.
From what I understand, intellectual property is usually undisclosed information,
Then you understand nothing. Go to google and do a search for "intellectual property faq." Read
it. Don't post again until you have.
Once you've done that, go find the guy who moderated you up as "INSIGHTFUL" and force him to eat a hard copy of the FAQ.
No box is 100% secure. HOWEVER, if the software vendor has said "Do X or your box is insecure" then (I believe) YOU are liable if your box is cracked. You are not SOLELY liable; the crackers are liable too, but you should be treated as an accessory to their crime.
This is the most insightful comment on the page; I'm glad SOMEBODY gets what open source is about. Everybody else is hereby commanded to go read 'The Cathedral and the Bazaar'
Unless rockets propel great masses of molten iron for exhaust, thermite isn't rocket fuel. It makes a great grenade, though.
Burning wood, paper, oil, gasoline, diesel fuel, etc. produces water. What's your point :)
Hydrogen burns clear
EVERYTHING burns clear. Flames are superheated gasses; the air becomes so hot that it glows. Sort of like iron. When you suggest that hydrogen burns clear, you are either saying that it burns so coolly that the air 'glows' in the infrared, or it burns so hot that it 'glows' mostly in the X-Ray spectrum. Both are ridiculous propositions.
And to top it all off, I've burned hydrogen, and it DEFINITELY produces a flame...
Clean cars being one example.
Yes, hydrogen-burning cars can be safe...because the hydrogen is dissolved in metal and it can't explode, and it is bled off continuously and dispersed.
You have been reading TOO much hydrogen car propoganda. Yes, hydrogen-powered cars can be good, but it is also true that hydrogen burns.Just like gasoline. Or diesel.
...and the reason you don't put water on gas fires is that gas floats, there's more total liquid, and you've effectively increased the surface area, making it burn more fiercely.
Lots of water might help, but otherwise...RUN!
The idea that PROPRIETARY software should only be reused in PROPRIETARY software is attractive. But the viral nature of COPYRIGHT LAW means that a line of code that is copied from one project to another contaminates other code that might be used in a third project. That's the intent of COPYRIGHT LAW - to eventually encumber the entire PROPRIETARY software pool. To me, it's distasteful that a line or two of code ties the hands of developers who have written a huge project of their own and who may never have seen a line from the original COPYRIGHTED project.
WHY ARE YOU COPYING CODE IF YOU DON'T WANT TO BE ENCUMBERED BY SOMEONE ELSE'S LICENSE? If you don't like my license, DON'T USE MY CODE! Why is this so hard to understand?
The funny thing is, you've got a patentable idea...and I could probably patent it.
Alice In Wonderland is in the public domain, else it wouldn't be a part of Project Guttenberg. Its redistribution cannot be limited in any way. This is not like the GPL, where if you disagree with the license (contract law) you can't make a copy of it (copyright law). If the permissions are to be considered a license, then simply refuse to accept it, and exercise your rights under copyright law to do whatever you want to do with the text.
KEEP IN MIND, HOWEVER that things like formatting, page layout, fonts, etc. CAN be copyrighted, independent of the underlying text, so don't go hog wild. Feel free, however, to read it aloud.
As a side note, let's suppose that the distributor decides to sue you. What are you going to do? They are clearly in the wrong, but can you afford to hire a lawyer to respond to all their briefs, arguments, and pleadings? Can you afford to defend yourself? Unless you're richer than me (and I make good money), you can't. They can't win, but you can't fight. Ergo, you lose.
This is why lawyers should be lined up and shot. Or at least kept out of legislative bodies.
Secondly I think that independent re-discovery of the technique should be an affirmative defense against patent infringement, that is, you can't patent a technique, keep it secret, and if then somebody else uses the same technique, suddenly surfaces with the patent and say "oh, here's our secret technique which we have patented, and this means you can't use it."
ESR is either being overly simplistic to make a point or he's ignorant of what a patent IS. You can't "patent a technique [and] keep it secret." A patent means that you make your invention a matter of PUBLIC RECORD. In return, you have a time-limited monopoly on the use of your invention. Because patenet information is available to everyone (legally speaking), you can't re-discover it, anymore than you can re-discover relativity. Sure, you could learn the same mathematics Einstein knew, start with his postulates, and proceed to the same conclusions, but NO ONE would suggest that you had re-discovered relativity.
Since patents are a matter of public record, it could become very difficult to sue someone for infringement. I could secretly research your patent. I could conduct a few months of phony research - perform experiments, build devices, and (most importantly) keep careful records. whatever. I could then 're-invent' your device, and I'd have the paperwork to show that it was independent. How would an outsider know that I had actually stolen it? How would you prove it? Yet stealing it is what I would have done.
I do agree that 'submarine' patents are bad; applications for patents should become immediately matters of public record.