Actually, natural selection is more of a factor of statistics. organisms with genetic factors that contribute to a greater likelihood of having offspring that will in turn have offspring who will have offspring, etc, are going to be more common over time. This doesn't mean that the worst candidate never reproduces or the best candidate always does. Sometimes an individual gets very lucky or unlucky. This is a big part of why natural selection is almost always a very slow, gradual process.
How do you figure that you will spend less on alcohol? if you have a DD, you are free to get too drunk to reasonably drive. Also, a DD is not going to necessarily be available on your schedule.
Except the federal money comes from people in their state. If being cut out of federal funding in a certain area meant that their citizens paid less federal taxes, there would be no conflict. However, as it stands, their citizens pay the same and get less if they don't comply.
It would show up since we absorb things through our mouths as well, probably not nearly as much, but it would still show up.. If the limit is 0, theoretically, a sensitive enough test would nail you a week after you drank a soda.
It's not the best of both worlds by any means. It throws lots of redundancy into the mix, and thus causes security risks. The problem occurs when packagers, typically third third parties, make the wrong assumptions about the software installed on a system. This causes a problem if someone wants to trim something away from a default install. Say a package depends on mono being installed, and some people prefer their systems without mono. If these new packages assume that it is guaranteed, it will be broken on their systems. This practice would cause problems far more common than what it fixes unless the assumption is absolutely barebones, in which case you are going to have 200MB packages for graphical text editors. Also, there's no need for a new package format to do this. These kinds of packages already exist, and they belong in/opt
Pretty much, yeah. If a library is likely to be needed in different versions, it'll be something like python where you have different libraries in different directories for different major versions.
If you remove a library that a lot of other programs are dependent upon, yes, it will do that. However, that is expected behavior. The only time its a problem is when packagers are a bit aggressive on what should be set as 'depends', and that's been a very rare problem for me.
Except you don't have dependency problems unless you are doing crazy shit that someone who couldn't figure them out would even know how to do in the first place. If you are smart enough to break it, you are smart enough to fix it.
Except for the fact that dependencies are already handled by package managers. It can already be done and is done transparently in Ubuntu Software Center.
It's a fork, so it had the exact same code at one point in time. It looks like the fork started with 5.1, so for anyone using 5.1 or earlier, they are on equal footing for compatibility. The advantage would go to whoever broke less in progressing to later versions, and I would not be surprised if that happened to be MariaDB.
True, but in regards to the existing customer base, I wouldn't be terribly surprised if MariaDB has better compatibility. If you are migrating to a new version, there might be less trouble with MariaDB.
I think you are forgetting the more important element here: porn. If you have access to more and more diverse porn than you could possibly ever watch, it'll be harder to convince you that you should blow yourself up for a religious cause. That, and a little bit of the exposure to outside ideas, but mostly the porn.
TPB does have a decent amount of legit content, and it's called a "BitTorrent site" because of the BitTorrent protocol. Similarly, sites that have 'gifs' in their name are not related to Compuserve.
Police then proceeded by comparing the ‘work copy’ that the IFPI investigator produced with the material that POLICE and the defending counsels had received
The article seems to state the evidence was gather by the IFPI, the Finnish anti-piracy people, and the MPAA executive. So, the IFPI appears to have had the evidence before the cops did, and your alleged chain is incorrect.
Actually, the only thing that the story says is that 10 files had their contents changed. The only known change is that of a username.
Also, the 'work copy' for comparison came from the IFPI, hardly an unbiased source, so we have no guarantee of its authenticity either. There was also no reason to 'protect the source.' First of all, it would trivial to get that info redacted. Secondly, even if they couldn't, usernames are probably not of significant value anyway.
Evidence tampering is a serious crime, with penalties up to 20 years the US. Not sure about Finland's laws, but significant jail time would be an appropriate and proportional response for these actions. "Sending a message" is when the response is disproportionate and inappropriate..
You could send over https now. However, that would allow the end user to freely share the content when it is decoded on their end. That wouldn't be DRM. DRM has to give you the keys at some point, but prevent you from using it. You need collusion with the makers of the end user equipment against the end user to do that.
Richard Nixon won two elections, Mitt Romney wasn't too far away, and Newt Gingrich was doing okay in the primaries for a while. Schmidt being president isn't all that outlandish.
Slashdot Mirror
Actually, natural selection is more of a factor of statistics. organisms with genetic factors that contribute to a greater likelihood of having offspring that will in turn have offspring who will have offspring, etc, are going to be more common over time. This doesn't mean that the worst candidate never reproduces or the best candidate always does. Sometimes an individual gets very lucky or unlucky. This is a big part of why natural selection is almost always a very slow, gradual process.
How do you figure that you will spend less on alcohol? if you have a DD, you are free to get too drunk to reasonably drive. Also, a DD is not going to necessarily be available on your schedule.
People that drunk need to drive to a hospital.
Only if the punishment is a spanking from the victim.
Chill the fuck out. You seriously need to have a drink.
Except the federal money comes from people in their state. If being cut out of federal funding in a certain area meant that their citizens paid less federal taxes, there would be no conflict. However, as it stands, their citizens pay the same and get less if they don't comply.
It would show up since we absorb things through our mouths as well, probably not nearly as much, but it would still show up.. If the limit is 0, theoretically, a sensitive enough test would nail you a week after you drank a soda.
Surely its not all that difficult to load the data from the internal storage elsewhere and decrypt it.
Couldn't law enforcement copy out the encrypted contents as well?
It's not the best of both worlds by any means. It throws lots of redundancy into the mix, and thus causes security risks. The problem occurs when packagers, typically third third parties, make the wrong assumptions about the software installed on a system. This causes a problem if someone wants to trim something away from a default install. Say a package depends on mono being installed, and some people prefer their systems without mono. If these new packages assume that it is guaranteed, it will be broken on their systems. This practice would cause problems far more common than what it fixes unless the assumption is absolutely barebones, in which case you are going to have 200MB packages for graphical text editors. Also, there's no need for a new package format to do this. These kinds of packages already exist, and they belong in /opt
I have a bit, but I was speaking more specifically about apt, since that's what Ubuntu uses.
Pretty much, yeah. If a library is likely to be needed in different versions, it'll be something like python where you have different libraries in different directories for different major versions.
If you remove a library that a lot of other programs are dependent upon, yes, it will do that. However, that is expected behavior. The only time its a problem is when packagers are a bit aggressive on what should be set as 'depends', and that's been a very rare problem for me.
Except you don't have dependency problems unless you are doing crazy shit that someone who couldn't figure them out would even know how to do in the first place. If you are smart enough to break it, you are smart enough to fix it.
Except for the fact that dependencies are already handled by package managers. It can already be done and is done transparently in Ubuntu Software Center.
It's a fork, so it had the exact same code at one point in time. It looks like the fork started with 5.1, so for anyone using 5.1 or earlier, they are on equal footing for compatibility. The advantage would go to whoever broke less in progressing to later versions, and I would not be surprised if that happened to be MariaDB.
True, but in regards to the existing customer base, I wouldn't be terribly surprised if MariaDB has better compatibility. If you are migrating to a new version, there might be less trouble with MariaDB.
I think you are forgetting the more important element here: porn. If you have access to more and more diverse porn than you could possibly ever watch, it'll be harder to convince you that you should blow yourself up for a religious cause. That, and a little bit of the exposure to outside ideas, but mostly the porn.
TPB does have a decent amount of legit content, and it's called a "BitTorrent site" because of the BitTorrent protocol. Similarly, sites that have 'gifs' in their name are not related to Compuserve.
The article seems to state the evidence was gather by the IFPI, the Finnish anti-piracy people, and the MPAA executive. So, the IFPI appears to have had the evidence before the cops did, and your alleged chain is incorrect.
Actually, the only thing that the story says is that 10 files had their contents changed. The only known change is that of a username.
Also, the 'work copy' for comparison came from the IFPI, hardly an unbiased source, so we have no guarantee of its authenticity either. There was also no reason to 'protect the source.' First of all, it would trivial to get that info redacted. Secondly, even if they couldn't, usernames are probably not of significant value anyway.
Evidence tampering is a serious crime, with penalties up to 20 years the US. Not sure about Finland's laws, but significant jail time would be an appropriate and proportional response for these actions. "Sending a message" is when the response is disproportionate and inappropriate..
How is #4 a stupid reason? I want to know what Natalie Portman tastes like while naked and covered in grits.
You could send over https now. However, that would allow the end user to freely share the content when it is decoded on their end. That wouldn't be DRM. DRM has to give you the keys at some point, but prevent you from using it. You need collusion with the makers of the end user equipment against the end user to do that.
Richard Nixon won two elections, Mitt Romney wasn't too far away, and Newt Gingrich was doing okay in the primaries for a while. Schmidt being president isn't all that outlandish.