Err... how is this interesting or insightful? It's barely related to the discussion! If what you're is referring to is the large corpus of paired texts they inject into the system, you've completely missed the point.
The cool science here is in the advancements in their statistical model and new techniques they've developed for "scoring" translations in order to improve their output. In addition, they've also demonstrated the ability to statistically translate whole phrases effectively, rather than individual words, which can also improve translation quality. The fact that you've missed all this makes me wonder if you actually *read* the press release.
Oh please... so many conspiracy theories. You do realize that the *internet* was originally developed by DARPA, right? My point: DARPA does a lot of work... not all of it revolves around spying on or otherwise taking away the rights of American citizens.
you must have a good development process in place and good common practice amongst your programmers.
Umm... if you're in a project that has 250,000 lines of code, and you *don't* have a "good development process in place and good common practice amongst your programmers", you're already a lost cause. The language the program is written in probably won't make much of a difference...
Yeah! 'cuz if we don't write all our software in the same language, the OSS movement is doomed!
WTF are you talking about? Divide the community... it's about the software, not the language. Who gives a damn if the code is written in Perl, Python, Ruby, or, heck, shell script, as long as it does something useful?
So, you have just moved one run down the ladder, but the question still remains.. How do the people pay for the more expensive goods? Do they work longer hours (Sucking up food and electricity)?
Oh puhlease! Yeah, 5 cents on each can or bottle you buy is a *real* hardship. Yup, I'm really gonna have to work longer hours for that. Phew! Honestly, were you able to type that with a straight face?
Now, there are two questions here. First, why is there a difference in price?
Its called economies of scale. In general, I'd wager that recycling, while more expensive in small operations, can be profitable on a large scale.
Moreover, unless recycling becomes more prominent, there simply will not be enough dollars put into optimizing existing recycling processes or inventing new, efficient methods of recycling currently unrecyclable products. Thus, we have a bit of a chicken and egg problem. How you wish to solve it is your problem (I'm a Canadian, and we recycle quite a bit of our waste... here in Edmonton, we have one of the largest recycling facilities in the country). One way is government regulation, another is things like tax breaks for corps doing work in the area. I'm sure there are many other solutions.
The second question to consider is, how is the company buying the tin going to pay for it?
There are many ways... for example, you can pass the cost onto the consumer in the form on a small additional tax/levy on the product. Combine this with things like government incentives (tax breaks, etc), and there are many solutions to this problem. So, no, you don't have to sell more or cheapen the goods (which ends up being the thesis for the rest of that paragraph).
No, DRM is a copyright protection scheme (amongst other things... it's also MS's attempt at solving the desktop security issue (hence sign applications), and probably many other things). This lawsuit is about patents. While MS is helping "lock people out of their own computers", it's not to protect IP in general, just copyrighted material, specifically. Frankly, I don't know what MS's stance is regarding software patents. They certainly seem to have no interest in either 1) collecting patents or 2) enforcing patents they already hold.
You know, the funniest thing about your post is that Microsoft is one of the least litigious companies out there, at least regarding patents. Yeah, they hold their fair share of IP, but when was the last time you heard of MS suing someone for patent violation? Oh, yes, they go after people who infringe on their *copyrights* (eg, the recent modchip debacle with the X-Box), and I can't really blame them for that... but I've never heard of them suing over patent violations.
Yes, if by profit you mean "short term monitary gain". 'course, that's the only kind of profit corporations focus on, so it's no surprise they don't consider recycling a priority. This is, of course, in constrast to "long term monitary and societal gain", as a result of reduced resource consumption, reduced health and environmental impacts, etc, etc.
Wow, this is a brilliant post. "We don't need to recycle 'cuz we still have plenty of room to put our massive amounts of garbage!". Seriously, that has to be the most unbelievably ridiculous thing I have ever heard. I don't *care* if there's lots of room to throw more garbage... it shouldn't go there in the first place. Especially things like circuit boards, etc, which contain many toxic chemicals (eg, lead, mercury, etc). Do *you* want this stuff seeping into your water table in 50 or a 100 years when the landfill lining breaks down (something which has happened at other sites already)?
Granted it still takes a lot longer than the windows attack
Which gives the admin time to detect the intrusion and deal with it. However, if a script kiddy can 0wn your network in a matter of minutes? That's a little more severe, don't ya think?
Besides, do you have *any* idea how hard it is to brute force a reasonably strong password (ie, one that won't fall to a dictionary-style attack... you do use random-character passwords for your admin accounts, right?)? Heck, assuming just an alpha-numeric password with 8 characters, you have 2821109907456 combinations (yes, that's 2.8 *trillion*).
Personally, while I sweat a lot, I find my exercise sweat doesn't stink. *shrug* Don't ask me why... I know my nervous sweat does. But exercise? Nope. So I just bring a change of clothes and, voila, no problems.
Why bother moving? Just take a more circuitous route to work. After all, no one says you have to take the most direct route. Personally, I'm about a 5 minute ride from work. However, rather than riding straight there, I vary my route so that, typically, I'm doing about 20-30 minutes a day. AND, as you get better at a given distance, simply extend your route... 20-30 minutes for a month, then 30-40, etc, etc
Yes, but I guess my question is really regarding "black-box" reverse engineering and "white-box" reverse engineering. ie, it's obviously okay to black-box reverse engineer (as demonstrated by Compaq's work on the IBM PC BIOS). However, I know there is a number of software licenses which attempt (key word, "attempt") to limit white-box reverse engineering... ie, the process of disassembling code in order to determine how it works. Would this be an issue here? Are these kinds of clauses even legal (part of me thinks not). It's something to think about, nonetheless.
And, of course, there's always the patent minefield (ie, company: "we've patented that technique for setting firmware registers in a wi-fi driver, your code is illegal!"). Yeah, I know... paranoid.:)
only 2 patents that have ever been assigned from Novell (who, last time we all looked, owned the copyrights to the code in question)
Talk about mixing your terminology. The article in question is about SCO registering their Unix copyrights. This has *nothing* to do with patents. All this does is grant SCO additional rights to seek damages in copyright infringement cases (ie, they aren't required to register their copyrights with the US gov't, but unlike most other countries who've implemented the Berne Convention, the US requires such registration in order to obtain certain legal privileges).
So, yes, they've been assigned something... it just ain't much (since they've been claiming to hold those copyrights all along).
Yikes, I wonder what the legalities of this are? It's entirely possible that the makers of the driver or firmware could attempt to sue the developers for, say, copyright infringement (after all, there are good reasons why Compaq isolated it's pack of developers when reverse-engineering the IBM BIOS) or something along those lines (after all, how many pieces of software come with (possibly invalid) clauses which attempt to make reverse engineering illegal).
Umm, it seems you've completely missed the point of the original poster. Anyone can write unreadable code!. If you use Perl 6's language mutability features in a way which makes the code unreadable, *it's your fault*! How is this any different from idiots who use #define in C to define BEGIN as { and END as }, etc, etc? Language features can be used for good or ill... it's up to the coder to do the right thing (IMHO).
something which, IMHO, is required for free speech... after all, what's the point of free speech if you're afraid to exercise that right?
Free speech is useless without anonymity. If you can't understand that, you're missing something. Just look at the red scare of the 50's... how many people were persecuted because they privately supported communism?
Hmm... interesting point. Of course, it should be noted that, theoretically, there is absolutely no way to track content to a given computer. Every node is anonymous, and a given node cannot determine where the contents of a file came from. Therefore, an interesting question is, how can the prosecution prove that the content came from your computer in the first place?
Because you're confusing the issue. Saying you like to abuse children is one thing. Doing it is another. Freenet guarantees your right to do the former, not the latter. Unfortunately, in order to guarantee that right, you also guarantee the right to distribute pictures of you abusing your children. Of course, the cure is to arrest the person who's abusing their children in the first place...
Slashdot Mirror
Err... how is this interesting or insightful? It's barely related to the discussion! If what you're is referring to is the large corpus of paired texts they inject into the system, you've completely missed the point.
The cool science here is in the advancements in their statistical model and new techniques they've developed for "scoring" translations in order to improve their output. In addition, they've also demonstrated the ability to statistically translate whole phrases effectively, rather than individual words, which can also improve translation quality. The fact that you've missed all this makes me wonder if you actually *read* the press release.
Oh please... so many conspiracy theories. You do realize that the *internet* was originally developed by DARPA, right? My point: DARPA does a lot of work... not all of it revolves around spying on or otherwise taking away the rights of American citizens.
You claim to have a grant, yet you can't even spell Alpha? Somehow, I'm a little skeptical...
you must have a good development process in place and good common practice amongst your programmers.
Umm... if you're in a project that has 250,000 lines of code, and you *don't* have a "good development process in place and good common practice amongst your programmers", you're already a lost cause. The language the program is written in probably won't make much of a difference...
Yeah! 'cuz if we don't write all our software in the same language, the OSS movement is doomed!
WTF are you talking about? Divide the community... it's about the software, not the language. Who gives a damn if the code is written in Perl, Python, Ruby, or, heck, shell script, as long as it does something useful?
Ahh... another coder that needs the language to hold their hand because they're unable to write clean code without the language forcing them to.
Sounds like you should try out Python.
So, you have just moved one run down the ladder, but the question still remains.. How do the people pay for the more expensive goods? Do they work longer hours (Sucking up food and electricity)?
Oh puhlease! Yeah, 5 cents on each can or bottle you buy is a *real* hardship. Yup, I'm really gonna have to work longer hours for that. Phew! Honestly, were you able to type that with a straight face?
Now, there are two questions here. First, why is there a difference in price?
Its called economies of scale. In general, I'd wager that recycling, while more expensive in small operations, can be profitable on a large scale.
Moreover, unless recycling becomes more prominent, there simply will not be enough dollars put into optimizing existing recycling processes or inventing new, efficient methods of recycling currently unrecyclable products. Thus, we have a bit of a chicken and egg problem. How you wish to solve it is your problem (I'm a Canadian, and we recycle quite a bit of our waste... here in Edmonton, we have one of the largest recycling facilities in the country). One way is government regulation, another is things like tax breaks for corps doing work in the area. I'm sure there are many other solutions.
The second question to consider is, how is the company buying the tin going to pay for it?
There are many ways... for example, you can pass the cost onto the consumer in the form on a small additional tax/levy on the product. Combine this with things like government incentives (tax breaks, etc), and there are many solutions to this problem. So, no, you don't have to sell more or cheapen the goods (which ends up being the thesis for the rest of that paragraph).
No, DRM is a copyright protection scheme (amongst other things... it's also MS's attempt at solving the desktop security issue (hence sign applications), and probably many other things). This lawsuit is about patents. While MS is helping "lock people out of their own computers", it's not to protect IP in general, just copyrighted material, specifically. Frankly, I don't know what MS's stance is regarding software patents. They certainly seem to have no interest in either 1) collecting patents or 2) enforcing patents they already hold.
You know, the funniest thing about your post is that Microsoft is one of the least litigious companies out there, at least regarding patents. Yeah, they hold their fair share of IP, but when was the last time you heard of MS suing someone for patent violation? Oh, yes, they go after people who infringe on their *copyrights* (eg, the recent modchip debacle with the X-Box), and I can't really blame them for that... but I've never heard of them suing over patent violations.
Heh, now *that* is insightful. :)
Yes, if by profit you mean "short term monitary gain". 'course, that's the only kind of profit corporations focus on, so it's no surprise they don't consider recycling a priority. This is, of course, in constrast to "long term monitary and societal gain", as a result of reduced resource consumption, reduced health and environmental impacts, etc, etc.
Wow, this is a brilliant post. "We don't need to recycle 'cuz we still have plenty of room to put our massive amounts of garbage!". Seriously, that has to be the most unbelievably ridiculous thing I have ever heard. I don't *care* if there's lots of room to throw more garbage... it shouldn't go there in the first place. Especially things like circuit boards, etc, which contain many toxic chemicals (eg, lead, mercury, etc). Do *you* want this stuff seeping into your water table in 50 or a 100 years when the landfill lining breaks down (something which has happened at other sites already)?
Incidentally, I left out capital letters in that calculation. Including those increases the number to 218340105584896 (ie, 218 trillion).
Granted it still takes a lot longer than the windows attack
Which gives the admin time to detect the intrusion and deal with it. However, if a script kiddy can 0wn your network in a matter of minutes? That's a little more severe, don't ya think?
Besides, do you have *any* idea how hard it is to brute force a reasonably strong password (ie, one that won't fall to a dictionary-style attack... you do use random-character passwords for your admin accounts, right?)? Heck, assuming just an alpha-numeric password with 8 characters, you have 2821109907456 combinations (yes, that's 2.8 *trillion*).
Ugh, you call this gently? My self-esteem is shattered! Excuse me, I need to cry in the bathroom for a few minutes... *whimper* ;)
Personally, while I sweat a lot, I find my exercise sweat doesn't stink. *shrug* Don't ask me why... I know my nervous sweat does. But exercise? Nope. So I just bring a change of clothes and, voila, no problems.
Why bother moving? Just take a more circuitous route to work. After all, no one says you have to take the most direct route. Personally, I'm about a 5 minute ride from work. However, rather than riding straight there, I vary my route so that, typically, I'm doing about 20-30 minutes a day. AND, as you get better at a given distance, simply extend your route... 20-30 minutes for a month, then 30-40, etc, etc
Yes, but I guess my question is really regarding "black-box" reverse engineering and "white-box" reverse engineering. ie, it's obviously okay to black-box reverse engineer (as demonstrated by Compaq's work on the IBM PC BIOS). However, I know there is a number of software licenses which attempt (key word, "attempt") to limit white-box reverse engineering... ie, the process of disassembling code in order to determine how it works. Would this be an issue here? Are these kinds of clauses even legal (part of me thinks not). It's something to think about, nonetheless.
:)
And, of course, there's always the patent minefield (ie, company: "we've patented that technique for setting firmware registers in a wi-fi driver, your code is illegal!"). Yeah, I know... paranoid.
only 2 patents that have ever been assigned from Novell (who, last time we all looked, owned the copyrights to the code in question)
Talk about mixing your terminology. The article in question is about SCO registering their Unix copyrights. This has *nothing* to do with patents. All this does is grant SCO additional rights to seek damages in copyright infringement cases (ie, they aren't required to register their copyrights with the US gov't, but unlike most other countries who've implemented the Berne Convention, the US requires such registration in order to obtain certain legal privileges).
So, yes, they've been assigned something... it just ain't much (since they've been claiming to hold those copyrights all along).
Yikes, I wonder what the legalities of this are? It's entirely possible that the makers of the driver or firmware could attempt to sue the developers for, say, copyright infringement (after all, there are good reasons why Compaq isolated it's pack of developers when reverse-engineering the IBM BIOS) or something along those lines (after all, how many pieces of software come with (possibly invalid) clauses which attempt to make reverse engineering illegal).
Umm, it seems you've completely missed the point of the original poster. Anyone can write unreadable code!. If you use Perl 6's language mutability features in a way which makes the code unreadable, *it's your fault*! How is this any different from idiots who use #define in C to define BEGIN as { and END as }, etc, etc? Language features can be used for good or ill... it's up to the coder to do the right thing (IMHO).
Umm... you completely missed my first point:
something which, IMHO, is required for free speech... after all, what's the point of free speech if you're afraid to exercise that right?
Free speech is useless without anonymity. If you can't understand that, you're missing something. Just look at the red scare of the 50's... how many people were persecuted because they privately supported communism?
Hmm... interesting point. Of course, it should be noted that, theoretically, there is absolutely no way to track content to a given computer. Every node is anonymous, and a given node cannot determine where the contents of a file came from. Therefore, an interesting question is, how can the prosecution prove that the content came from your computer in the first place?
Because you're confusing the issue. Saying you like to abuse children is one thing. Doing it is another. Freenet guarantees your right to do the former, not the latter. Unfortunately, in order to guarantee that right, you also guarantee the right to distribute pictures of you abusing your children. Of course, the cure is to arrest the person who's abusing their children in the first place...