It's not quite that bad. You can learn to read backwards, and probably can tell people that they can read backwards, but you'd be on shaky ground if you taught people to read backwards and you almost certainly can't sell other devices to replace the lensing device or a device to modify the book. --
Microwaves are optimized to produce microwave radiation and use a wave guide to concentrate the energy in an enclosed space. Faraday cages are very good at blocking high frequency radiation so not much leaves the box.
In CPU design, radiated power is minimized because it is required to get an FCC license of the device and because radiated power can cause interference within the box itself which is obviously a bad thing.
According to George Carlin's "Filthy Words" routine they are "shit, piss, fuck, cunt, cocksucker, mother-fucker, and tits". Although, I don't think you're allowed to say asshole either.
Not on the archived stories, they are stored statically as flat, not dynamically generated like normal stories. I really wish they were at least nested. --
Re:Telnet is the only solution.
on
SSH v. SRP
·
· Score: 2
Nobody says you have to get rid of telnet. Just telnetd. --
3 b) Accompany it with a written offer, valid for at least three years, to give any third party, for a charge no more than your cost of physically performing source distribution, a complete machine-readable copy of the corresponding source code, to be distributed under the terms of Sections 1 and 2 above on a mediumcustomarily used for software interchange; or, --
It'd be a stretch. Since no one is forced to accept the GPL, strictly speaking a violation of the GPL is really only a violation of default copyright law and as such the copyright holder is the only one who can bring a civil case. --
As mentioned elsewhere, GPL is different from an EULA, since if you do not accept it you can still use the software under your default fair use rights and any other rights you may have such as reverse engineering.
You can think of the GPL as two licenses: a) You do not accept (or even read) the GPL, you have a default 'license' based on the laws of your jurisdiction.
b) You accept the GPL, you have additional rights probably not granted to you in a) such as the ability to distribute derivative works.
This is different than a normal EULA which is: a) You do not accept the license: you may not use or perhaps download this software. You may be able to get a refund.
b) You do accept the license, you can use the software with more restrictions than your default.
It would simply be your normal fair use rights of copyrighted material, archival copies, parody, certain educational and research use, and derivative works for personal use. For practical purposes, you can do anything you want except distribute copies or derivative works. --
NT 4.0 comes with IE 2. This version can't access www.microsoft.com. No alternate page, nothing. Just a message like "You don't have permission to list the virtual directory/". In order to download IE, the easiest thing to do is to get Netscape (any old one will do) then go back to the Microsoft website with Netscape, wade through the ActiveXisms and get an IE.
I'm no zealot. I use Linux/Netscape for most things, but I think IE 5 is one of the best graphical browsers for stability and speed on any platform. However, the fact that 2.0 can't access www.microsoft.com suggests some serious issues on both ends. --
OT: ReGet spawns multiple connections to an FTP server with different offsets and kills them after a small transfer. This is a nasty thing to do to a server since they are optimized for full file transfers.
You do not have to accept the GPL. However, if you accept it, you are granted rights that you would not have normally because the work is otherwise governed by the default protections of copyright. --
Why then, do you charge different prices in different countries?
Because of different distribution costs in those countries. Different markets have different markups because each market has it's own distribution system which requires different markups so that the people along that distribution chain can be paid for their work.
(This is the standard reason given by most hardware manufacturers as to why PCs cost about 50% more in certain parts of the world than in others.)
Region codes exist on DVDs in order to prevent retail marketers from circumventing their own internal distribution model. That is, the distributors that the studios deal with to distribute materials around the world pretty much demanded that some sort of region code be added so that the distributors can maintain their effective market position, rather than be bypassed by the store fronts who could otherwise buy the materials from a distributor in another country and save money.
This is at best a specious argument. If a retailer can legally get the product for lower cost than the distributor will sell it, then the cost that they pay is the distribution cost. Exactly what gives the middleman the right to be inefficient. He has made no input to the creative process, which is the sole claim studios have for their copyright monopoly. Indeed there will be different prices in different countries, but these should be determined by the market and taxes.
Closer to the truth is the fact that US filmakers release films overseas later than the US release to be able to recycle film and save on marketing costs. They don't want to compete with DVDs of their own movies.
So you do agree that once you've bought the DVD drive and the DVD disk, you have the right to use whatever tools you want to view it on a Linux computer?
Of course. However, you do not have the right to distribute those tools, or to repurpose those tools to violate studio's intellectual property rights by copying the tracks off the DVD for potential redistribution across the 'net.
First of all, copying a track off a DVD for my personal use is my right. I may want to watch my DVD on my laptop which doesn't have a DVD drive. In the case of TV and CDs courts have said that time shifted viewing and viewing on a different device is ok under the principle of fair use. Distribution, not copying is illegal, therfore tools to enable copying should not be illegal (and certainly not ones needed for viewing).
One thing that Mr. Valenti does get is the explosive nature of bandwidth over the Internet. That is, while now it is impractical to download a 10gb movie file, tomorrow better compression technology and higher bandwidths will make it trivial to do. Just as 10 years ago, the thought of storing one record album for playback on your computer was seen as completely impractical--while now, people are routinely storing dozens of CDs on their hard disk for convenient playback.
While this is true, the fact of the matter is, if I can view a file in any way on a PC, I can copy it (with potentially reduced quality). Are you going to insist that CSS be put in every video card and that frame capture cards should obey Macrovision? (I wouldn't be surprised).
You can't win by fighting the ability to copy, only by stopping mass distribution. One of the best ways to stop mass distibution is with reasonable pricing. Copying inevitably costs more in time, materials and/or bandwidth than the initial production. If it doesn't than the producer should be using different technology. Make the price reasonable and people will gladly purchase the real deal. --
(It is sorta like the GPL. Only the liscense gives you the ability to use the product)
You do not need to accept the GPL to use a GPLed product. In fact the GPL forces whoever gave you the copy to place no restrictions on your use.
But since the software is copyrighted, you are prevented by law from making derivative works outside the bounds of fair use UNLESS you accept the license. So the GPL is giving you rights you would not ordinarily have and you can choose to accept it to gain those rights.
Ordinary shrink wrapped licenses may take away rights you ordinarily have, such as freedom to discuss the performance of a software package, freedom to make archival backups, freedom to resell or lend your software, etc. You do not have a choice to use the software without accepting the license. --
The problem isn't that there are too many bugs in W2K, but that there are too few. To understand this consider the following Microsoft algorithm for bug tracking (patent pending).
Most developers would be satisfied with a bug count in the low hundreds for a project the size of W2K. Microsoft, however has outdone itself. W2K actually has a NEGATIVE NUMBER OF BUGS: hence the underflow of the unsigned bugCount. --
If your contract includes a non-disclosure agreement and a trade secret is released somehow, does your employer have the right to tap your home phone and read home mail? I hope not.
Criminal investigations conducted by an appropriate government agency with a legal warrant should be the only searches of private property allowed in a free society.
As I understand it, in the US to win a suit on grounds of slander or libel you need to prove actual damage to the plaintiff by the speech or writing. The courts have made it extremely hard for public figures of any kind to prove these damages since they have to show that people believed some nobody with limited access to the media were believed more than a well known public figure with media access and that there was actual harm done. Theoretically normal people have an easier time sueing for slander/libel since they have less power to defend themselves outside of court.
In England I think it is easier to sue for slander/libel because in most cases the defendant has to demonstrate evidence to justify what he/she has stated. --
Slashdot Mirror
It's not quite that bad. You can learn to read backwards, and probably can tell people that they can read backwards, but you'd be on shaky ground if you taught people to read backwards and you almost certainly can't sell other devices to replace the lensing device or a device to modify the book.
--
I wasn't precisely sure myself, so I checked
Google
--
Microwaves are optimized to produce microwave radiation and use a wave guide to concentrate the energy in an enclosed space. Faraday cages are very good at blocking high frequency radiation so not much leaves the box.
In CPU design, radiated power is minimized because it is required to get an FCC license of the device and because radiated power can cause interference within the box itself which is obviously a bad thing.
--
Fortunately for the engineers, there are FCC requirements for emissions and inteference, so they can tell the markedroids to shove it.
--
According to George Carlin's "Filthy Words" routine they are "shit, piss, fuck, cunt, cocksucker, mother-fucker, and tits". Although, I don't think you're allowed to say asshole either.
--
They might not have \dev\null but I was surprised to find \etc\hosts buried in the NT 4 system folder.
--
My personal favorite (especially since I have gone around it many times) is Detour, MD
--
NIST agrees with your first link. The issue, as I understand it is that leap seconds replace leap days for finer tweaking.
--
Not on the archived stories, they are stored statically as flat, not dynamically generated like normal stories. I really wish they were at least nested.
--
Nobody says you have to get rid of telnet. Just telnetd.
--
3 b) Accompany it with a written offer, valid for at least three years, to give any third party, for a charge no more than your cost of physically performing source distribution, a complete machine-readable copy of the corresponding source code, to be distributed under the terms of Sections 1 and 2 above on a mediumcustomarily used for software interchange; or,
--
It'd be a stretch. Since no one is forced to accept the GPL, strictly speaking a violation of the GPL is really only a violation of default copyright law and as such the copyright holder is the only one who can bring a civil case.
--
As mentioned elsewhere, GPL is different from an EULA, since if you do not accept it you can still use the software under your default fair use rights and any other rights you may have such as reverse engineering.
You can think of the GPL as two licenses:
a) You do not accept (or even read) the GPL, you have a default 'license' based on the laws of your jurisdiction.
b) You accept the GPL, you have additional rights probably not granted to you in a) such as the ability to distribute derivative works.
This is different than a normal EULA which is:
a) You do not accept the license: you may not use or perhaps download this software. You may be able to get a refund.
b) You do accept the license, you can use the software with more restrictions than your default.
--
It would simply be your normal fair use rights of copyrighted material, archival copies, parody, certain educational and research use, and derivative works for personal use. For practical purposes, you can do anything you want except distribute copies or derivative works.
--
NT 4.0 comes with IE 2. This version can't access www.microsoft.com. No alternate page, nothing. Just a message like "You don't have permission to list the virtual directory /". In order to download IE, the easiest thing to do is to get Netscape (any old one will do) then go back to the Microsoft website with Netscape, wade through the ActiveXisms and get an IE.
I'm no zealot. I use Linux/Netscape for most things, but I think IE 5 is one of the best graphical browsers for stability and speed on any platform. However, the fact that 2.0 can't access www.microsoft.com suggests some serious issues on both ends.
--
OT:
ReGet spawns multiple connections to an FTP server with different offsets and kills them after a small transfer. This is a nasty thing to do to a server since they are optimized for full file transfers.
linux-kernel note about ReGet
--
You do not have to accept the GPL. However, if you accept it, you are granted rights that you would not have normally because the work is otherwise governed by the default protections of copyright.
--
This is at best a specious argument. If a retailer can legally get the product for lower cost than the distributor will sell it, then the cost that they pay is the distribution cost. Exactly what gives the middleman the right to be inefficient. He has made no input to the creative process, which is the sole claim studios have for their copyright monopoly. Indeed there will be different prices in different countries, but these should be determined by the market and taxes.
Closer to the truth is the fact that US filmakers release films overseas later than the US release to be able to recycle film and save on marketing costs. They don't want to compete with DVDs of their own movies.
So you do agree that once you've bought the DVD drive and the DVD disk, you have the right to use whatever tools you want to view it on a Linux computer?
First of all, copying a track off a DVD for my personal use is my right. I may want to watch my DVD on my laptop which doesn't have a DVD drive. In the case of TV and CDs courts have said that time shifted viewing and viewing on a different device is ok under the principle of fair use. Distribution, not copying is illegal, therfore tools to enable copying should not be illegal (and certainly not ones needed for viewing).
While this is true, the fact of the matter is, if I can view a file in any way on a PC, I can copy it (with potentially reduced quality). Are you going to insist that CSS be put in every video card and that frame capture cards should obey Macrovision? (I wouldn't be surprised).
You can't win by fighting the ability to copy, only by stopping mass distribution. One of the best ways to stop mass distibution is with reasonable pricing. Copying inevitably costs more in time, materials and/or bandwidth than the initial production. If it doesn't than the producer should be using different technology. Make the price reasonable and people will gladly purchase the real deal.
--
You do not need to accept the GPL to use a GPLed product. In fact the GPL forces whoever gave you the copy to place no restrictions on your use.
But since the software is copyrighted, you are prevented by law from making derivative works outside the bounds of fair use UNLESS you accept the license. So the GPL is giving you rights you would not ordinarily have and you can choose to accept it to gain those rights.
Ordinary shrink wrapped licenses may take away rights you ordinarily have, such as freedom to discuss the performance of a software package, freedom to make archival backups, freedom to resell or lend your software, etc. You do not have a choice to use the software without accepting the license.
--
At least read the code.
--
The problem isn't that there are too many bugs in W2K, but that there are too few. To understand this consider the following Microsoft algorithm for bug tracking (patent pending).
unsigned int bugCount=0;
for(int i=0; i<LINES_OF_CODE; i++)
bugCount += isBuggy(line[i]) ? +1 : -1;
Most developers would be satisfied with a bug count in the low hundreds for a project the size of W2K. Microsoft, however has outdone itself. W2K actually has a NEGATIVE NUMBER OF BUGS: hence the underflow of the unsigned bugCount.
--
If your contract includes a non-disclosure agreement and a trade secret is released somehow, does your employer have the right to tap your home phone and read home mail? I hope not.
Criminal investigations conducted by an appropriate government agency with a legal warrant should be the only searches of private property allowed in a free society.
--
As I understand it, in the US to win a suit on grounds of slander or libel you need to prove actual damage to the plaintiff by the speech or writing. The courts have made it extremely hard for public figures of any kind to prove these damages since they have to show that people believed some nobody with limited access to the media were believed more than a well known public figure with media access and that there was actual harm done. Theoretically normal people have an easier time sueing for slander/libel since they have less power to defend themselves outside of court.
In England I think it is easier to sue for slander/libel because in most cases the defendant has to demonstrate evidence to justify what he/she has stated.
--
If all you want to do is to allow outgoing mail, just stop running sendmail in daemon mode. With redhat you can do this with
chkconfig sendmail off
In other OSes you may have to edit the startup scripts directly. Programs needing to send mail will execute sendmail in send only mode.
You can email me directly if you have specific problems.
--
This could be what you were referring to.
--