By "it appears as though the Socket A based Sempron performs abysmally" they probably mean that these $30-40 budget processors are only ~5-8 times faster than as say a "K6-2 400" or equalient "Pentium 2" -- processors which did provide and still provide all the performance you need on a non-gaming/non-dev desktop machine.
"Bah, these $30 chips don't run Doom 3 at Max Extreme Settings. We're so disappointed. They are useless!"
BayStar intends to file an action requesting a declaratory judgment with respect to its rights under the Stock Repurchase Agreement. Until a final determination is made by the court, BayStar maintains its position as a Series A-1 Preferred stockholder of SCO.
I run my own domain (webserver, email, mailinglist) off a dynamic IP broadband connection.
>Can't do it?
I could given the necessary tools.
>Don't know what IP addresses are?
Why yes, yes I do.
>Don't know how to manage a DNS server?
Enough for my internal use.
> That means you're not qualified to manage a domain/MTA.
Elitist bullshit. I've managed my domain for years without problem.
If this standard means that "small users" such as myself are cut off from running domains/MTAs and sending/recieving email (via our own servers), then it sucks and is contrary to spirit, even intention, of the Internet as an enabler and communications tool to which access is not dictated and controlled by Big Interests.
Sounds like SPF is just another step in segmenting the internet into "consumers" and "providers".
Kind of hard, since it doesn't exist. And hey, even the Book of Fairy Tales And Floating Axes say that no man has seen the face of gawd, right?
Could we please moderate the creationists -1, Dumbass and move on?
I seem to remember one hypothesis about hindwalking in monkeys being water. Apparently they will 'wade' through streams and other bodies of water on their hind legs only. Doing this in water offloads some stress on their bodies, which differs significantly from ours in respect to the position of the legs/knees, pelvis and spine.
>I cannot imagine that it would survive a court battle with its claims intact.
But that doesn't actually matter, because nowadays you don't have to make money on patents per se, because you can make money more easily on playing the stock market, and patents -- combined with the stupidity of the press -- is a valuable tool for manipulators.
When the patent is voided the insiders will have cashed in and moved on a long, long time ago.
They want special rules for software patents? Well then, how about this: You can only be granted a patent on process A which achieves X if you in the patent describe a process B which also achieves X, which is released for everyone to use. B of course would typically not be as effective (memory, time, whatever) as A, so the patent grants you, for a limited time, the exclusive right to one [efficient] method to achieve something, but it can never give you a monopoly. Of course, someone else is free to come up with a method C which is as efficient or better than your A, but they must then describe their own 'B-method' distinct from any described in another patent.
This way, for example, if you find a way effecively model some data for efficient compression, you can get a patent on that, if you provide another way to build the same model. Companies wouldn't be able to patent ten methods and only give one unique back. The incentive to innovate would still be there, after all, you have the right to the most efficient method.
Anyone know if this has ever been considered/researched?
(Probably should specifically exclude generic solutions as "enumerate *.*" from allowable B-methods, a little messy, but I'll leave that to the lawyers/researches to figure out)
Yeah, everyone knows the correct pattern is $(sillything)-o-matic. For instance, I'd buy a Sludge-o-Matic(TM), but I'd never buy a SludgeMatic(TM) -- cause -- well, that just sounds completely stupid.
Well, how serious are you about software development? I'd answer "yes", but it depends on how rich you are in time and money and where you're going.
I did have some reservations (or minor nits) about the original, would be interesting to hear if these have been addressed:
[...] I could comment on the fact that he writes about implementing his own crypto and does not caution the reader that they shouldn't do that unless they are cryptographers, or atleast know what they're doing. I could mention that he on page 433 claims, without reservation, that a debugger will execute every statement on a single line of source, as if it were a unit. I could wonder about the omission of the generally lauded practice of writing [pointer comparisons] such that the constant is on the left hand side of the comparison operator. [...]
I read the previous edition, and my feeling then was that it, between the lines, sang the gospel of Pair Programming. Anyone else got that impression? I don't think it was ever mentioned specifically in that edition, though I could certainly be wrong on that.
Slashdot Mirror
Which one wanted the giant spider?
By "it appears as though the Socket A based Sempron performs abysmally" they probably mean that these $30-40 budget processors are only ~5-8 times faster than as say a "K6-2 400" or equalient "Pentium 2" -- processors which did provide and still provide all the performance you need on a non-gaming/non-dev desktop machine.
"Bah, these $30 chips don't run Doom 3 at Max Extreme Settings. We're so disappointed. They are useless!"
I've heard multiple reports of 5xx from users in the UK
I use zoneedit, which supports TXT records. I just added a TXT record for my FQDN with the data "c=spf1 a -all" you gave.
If I can forget about SPF now I will be very happy. Thank you.
SCO says:
BayStar answers:
Are violators of the GPL going to have to pay fines or be forced to open source the code they designed in conjunction with GPL'd code
They are going to have to stop infringing, just like today. This means removing the infringing code from, or GPLing, the product. There's a choice.
Of course, repeated willful infringment can and should definitely lead to fines.
IANAL
> As for the small user: How small?
I run my own domain (webserver, email, mailinglist) off a dynamic IP broadband connection.
>Can't do it?
I could given the necessary tools.
>Don't know what IP addresses are?
Why yes, yes I do.
>Don't know how to manage a DNS server?
Enough for my internal use.
> That means you're not qualified to manage a domain/MTA.
Elitist bullshit. I've managed my domain for years without problem.
If this standard means that "small users" such as myself are cut off from running domains/MTAs and sending/recieving email (via our own servers), then it sucks and is contrary to spirit, even intention, of the Internet as an enabler and communications tool to which access is not dictated and controlled by Big Interests.
Sounds like SPF is just another step in segmenting the internet into "consumers" and "providers".
Yes, I worry.
After all look at the God
Kind of hard, since it doesn't exist. And hey, even the Book of Fairy Tales And Floating Axes say that no man has seen the face of gawd, right?
Could we please moderate the creationists -1, Dumbass and move on?
I seem to remember one hypothesis about hindwalking in monkeys being water. Apparently they will 'wade' through streams and other bodies of water on their hind legs only. Doing this in water offloads some stress on their bodies, which differs significantly from ours in respect to the position of the legs/knees, pelvis and spine.
Great idea! Let's give the scumsucking "IP"-terrorists our money. That'll show them!
>I cannot imagine that it would survive a court battle with its claims intact.
But that doesn't actually matter, because nowadays you don't have to make money on patents per se, because you can make money more easily on playing the stock market, and patents -- combined with the stupidity of the press -- is a valuable tool for manipulators.
When the patent is voided the insiders will have cashed in and moved on a long, long time ago.
Slashdot nerds will complain that iPod's do not have OGG support and are thus evil and should never be purchased.
No Vorbis support doesn't make it evil, just worthless (for me).
So what's the ratio of English to non-English natives on the sites sampled?
There's articles?!
Why is it that Trillian has such enormous mindshare over Miranda?
I'm suddenly reminded why amdzone is no longer on my sites-I-check-every-day rotation.
I've done this. Though I must admit I do not recall how the contestents [fared].
Me too. The final category was something like "Viking settlements" and I screamed "Birka!"... which later proved to be the answer they sought.
And I don't even have a habit of doing that, just a one-off. Lucky for me, I had a witness too :-)
Why haven't more games added this feature?
Probably because it works so well to have it non-integrated. I haven't found a game yet that doesn't work with Ventrilo.
Global Software Piracy Study[sic]
See if you can figure out the model they used to arrive at their figures.
They want special rules for software patents? Well then, how about this: You can only be granted a patent on process A which achieves X if you in the patent describe a process B which also achieves X, which is released for everyone to use. B of course would typically not be as effective (memory, time, whatever) as A, so the patent grants you, for a limited time, the exclusive right to one [efficient] method to achieve something, but it can never give you a monopoly. Of course, someone else is free to come up with a method C which is as efficient or better than your A, but they must then describe their own 'B-method' distinct from any described in another patent.
This way, for example, if you find a way effecively model some data for efficient compression, you can get a patent on that, if you provide another way to build the same model. Companies wouldn't be able to patent ten methods and only give one unique back. The incentive to innovate would still be there, after all, you have the right to the most efficient method.
Anyone know if this has ever been considered/researched?
(Probably should specifically exclude generic solutions as "enumerate *.*" from allowable B-methods, a little messy, but I'll leave that to the lawyers/researches to figure out)
I've grown rather fond of the idea of having electronic magazines as opposed to paper versions.
Here's one: The Inventory
You can't make animations with PNG files....
Sure you can, only the result is called MNG.
Yeah, everyone knows the correct pattern is $(sillything)-o-matic. For instance, I'd buy a Sludge-o-Matic(TM), but I'd never buy a SludgeMatic(TM) -- cause -- well, that just sounds completely stupid.
Well, how serious are you about software development? I'd answer "yes", but it depends on how rich you are in time and money and where you're going.
I did have some reservations (or minor nits) about the original, would be interesting to hear if these have been addressed:
I read the previous edition, and my feeling then was that it, between the lines, sang the gospel of Pair Programming. Anyone else got that impression? I don't think it was ever mentioned specifically in that edition, though I could certainly be wrong on that.
... was just released.
Only available on mirrors, currently.