And Microsoft took the inspiration from them. Things were different back then - if you saw a good idea, you could take it, adapt it, try to improve upon it - or just copy it to improve your own product. Before software patents became so valued, and companies wanted to make every word they used a trademark.
Today? Well, ieee1394 goes by three different names depending upon who uses it, because any company that holds a trademark would never use a generic word in it's place.
The same reason Winamp died* and WMA became the only audio format able to almost challenge MP3 for dominence, even though it's propritary and support is very limited. Microsoft bundled WMP, including the ability to rip CDs, but only to their propritary format. A lot of home movies are also made in WMV format purely because Windows Movie Maker is bundled. If you want to take over, bundling works.
Then you don't get any money at all. There are only two ways to get software on an iPhone - the market, and jailbreaking. The jailbreakers are a tiny portion of the market.
He still has to get some power democratically though, before he could use it to destroy the very system that put him in power. If you want a more recent example, how about Hamas? Democratically elected, yet it openly advocates genocide and is classified as a terrorist organisation by quite a number of governments. The only reason they havn't pulled a Hitler is that they don't have the military strength.
Democracy can bring stability only it's filled with so many checks, limitations and safeguards that it's just about impossible for anyone, no matter how popular, to actually come to full power. Look at the US, for example - the most powerful individual is the president, but what can he do? He can't pass a law. He can declare war, but he won't be keeping it up long without congressional approval. He can't stay in office more than eight years no matter what, so there isn't enough time to built such a base of power he can't be impeached, or to completly pack the appointed offices with croneys. So it is possible for a democractic system to bring stability - if it's properly engineered, and if the people actually want stability. The former depends upon who writes the constitution, and the latter isn't always the case.
If there was an assumption that all private conversations would be made public, diplomacy would take the form of hushed conversations in a broom cupboard with no written account being made. Politicians would play diplomacy like actors, putting on a show for the people, while the real work was done informally and secretively.
It works the other way around: Those who havn't shown a career of consistant loyalty to the right people aren't going to get into the supreme court. Those people being the democratic or republican parties - which one just depends who is president at the time of appointment. Neither one can afford to appoint a judge that isn't going to advance the agenda of their party, because that's exactly what the other party will do regardless.
It'll still be closed if only you can run it, and it's impossible to have any form of mass-distribution (Be this enforced by technological, marketing or legal means).
Re:Kevin Bacon has played many roles in his career
on
X-Men: First Class
·
· Score: 2
Everything wrong with the movie industry can be seen in one movie: Transformers 2. It sucked. It didn't just suck, it redefined suckage. The writing, the characters, the blatant racism, the huge plot holes, the complete stupidity of every detail was an insult to the audience. It raped the franchise. It made a fortune.
And what is he going to do? He doesn't have any legal recourse. Even if the other students come to his aid, and don't back down when the administration threatens to suspend them too, and they are somehow able to exert enough pressure... the very best he can hope for is to have the suspension stricken. Even then, he'll be on the unofficial list of troublemakers, which rules him out of being chosen to do anything public by the school ever again. So in the best possible outcome he gains absolutly nothing over what he started with, and has lost time off school, personal stress, the loss of friends and the goodwill of teachers until graduation. Sounds like losing to me. The message is clear: Don't fuck with the powers that be. It's a valuable lesson though, and one everyone needs to learn sooner or later. Don't fight the injustices of the world unless you are willing to become a martyr.
I work at a school. I wish we had the first attitude, because a lot of our pupils are worthless little shits. But, being British, our attitude is more 'Do as we ask you, or we'll have to tell you again.' Sort of like the UN. There is no fear of the staff, so the pupils run riot.
Though used as a punishment, it doesn't really feel like one for the student who gets time to sit at home and play computer games. It's used as a way to get rid of unruly students who disrupt the teaching or pose a risk of violence to others, and as a way to make sure the parent knows very well just how much trouble that pupil is in.
No, he learning a much more valuable lesson: If authority wants to screw you, bend over and drop your pants. If you fight back, they'll just make it all the harder on you - and even if you win, you lose.
Schiavo was a special case - it went Political. It was in the best interests of a few politicians to milk her for every vote she was worth. End-of-life issues are a great thing for that - they allow for a tremendous amount of grandstanding, and yet will only actually directly effect a vanishingly tiny number of people.
Purgatory? No, it's a deadly sin. Straight to Hell.
There is one possible loophole. In theory, a deadly sin can be confessed like any other - but it's obviously impossible in suicide. Almost. If you used some form of slow-acting suicide like a drug overdose, then you could confess the sin before it takes effect. The tricky part is getting genuine repentance. Some use of drugs may be required to provide a temporary mood lift or pain reduction to make sure you genuinely regret the suicide. It'd be tricky, depending on predicting mood changes and timeing of drugs, but it might be doable.
On a more practical side, those catholic things do matter - they run quite a few hospitals, and those hospitals are required to follow the church teachings. That means if you're in a Catholic hospital, even in a state that permits assisted suicide, you arn't getting it. They just won't sign the paperwork, though they'll transfer you to a hospital that will.
I find it amusing that the 9/11 attack killed slightly more people than died in one month of traffic fatalities in the US* - but you don't see anywhere near as much fuss being made over the 9/11 attack the US suffers every month on the roads.
*It'd be slightly less these days - more cars, more deaths. When it comes to death, people have no sense of proportion.
Government, and religion. This is slashdot, where we blame religion for everything, but this time that is where the blame belongs. There's a lot of superstitious thought around - people who think human life is something magical and supernatural, which must be sustained by any means until the very last moment.
Do not underestimate the power of twats. They only need a single report to take out of context, and they have their excuse. Just look at the antivax movement. They got exactly one study linking vaccination to autism, and that was withdrawn some years later with the researcher's in disgrace. There are hundreds of studies showing no link. And yet the anti-vax movement is still going strong, driven by powerful appeals to fear.
Slashdot Mirror
And Microsoft took the inspiration from them. Things were different back then - if you saw a good idea, you could take it, adapt it, try to improve upon it - or just copy it to improve your own product. Before software patents became so valued, and companies wanted to make every word they used a trademark.
Today? Well, ieee1394 goes by three different names depending upon who uses it, because any company that holds a trademark would never use a generic word in it's place.
You can you compare the code? Apple aren't going to release theirs.
The same reason Winamp died* and WMA became the only audio format able to almost challenge MP3 for dominence, even though it's propritary and support is very limited. Microsoft bundled WMP, including the ability to rip CDs, but only to their propritary format. A lot of home movies are also made in WMV format purely because Windows Movie Maker is bundled. If you want to take over, bundling works.
*And realplayer, but who misses that?
Then you don't get any money at all. There are only two ways to get software on an iPhone - the market, and jailbreaking. The jailbreakers are a tiny portion of the market.
Why not? Here in the UK, we're trademarked the color orange.
It wasn't when I posted. When a new story is posted, Slashdot does the zerg thing.
In before someone posts Goatse.
http://d.facdn.net/art/mearu/1291214087.mearu_tigerlilycopy-1.jpg
He still has to get some power democratically though, before he could use it to destroy the very system that put him in power. If you want a more recent example, how about Hamas? Democratically elected, yet it openly advocates genocide and is classified as a terrorist organisation by quite a number of governments. The only reason they havn't pulled a Hitler is that they don't have the military strength.
Democracy can bring stability only it's filled with so many checks, limitations and safeguards that it's just about impossible for anyone, no matter how popular, to actually come to full power. Look at the US, for example - the most powerful individual is the president, but what can he do? He can't pass a law. He can declare war, but he won't be keeping it up long without congressional approval. He can't stay in office more than eight years no matter what, so there isn't enough time to built such a base of power he can't be impeached, or to completly pack the appointed offices with croneys. So it is possible for a democractic system to bring stability - if it's properly engineered, and if the people actually want stability. The former depends upon who writes the constitution, and the latter isn't always the case.
If there was an assumption that all private conversations would be made public, diplomacy would take the form of hushed conversations in a broom cupboard with no written account being made. Politicians would play diplomacy like actors, putting on a show for the people, while the real work was done informally and secretively.
What makes democracy so stable? One charismatic leader comes along and gets elected, and you've got World War Two to deal with.
It works the other way around: Those who havn't shown a career of consistant loyalty to the right people aren't going to get into the supreme court. Those people being the democratic or republican parties - which one just depends who is president at the time of appointment. Neither one can afford to appoint a judge that isn't going to advance the agenda of their party, because that's exactly what the other party will do regardless.
It'll still be closed if only you can run it, and it's impossible to have any form of mass-distribution (Be this enforced by technological, marketing or legal means).
Everything wrong with the movie industry can be seen in one movie: Transformers 2. It sucked. It didn't just suck, it redefined suckage. The writing, the characters, the blatant racism, the huge plot holes, the complete stupidity of every detail was an insult to the audience. It raped the franchise. It made a fortune.
And what is he going to do? He doesn't have any legal recourse. Even if the other students come to his aid, and don't back down when the administration threatens to suspend them too, and they are somehow able to exert enough pressure... the very best he can hope for is to have the suspension stricken. Even then, he'll be on the unofficial list of troublemakers, which rules him out of being chosen to do anything public by the school ever again. So in the best possible outcome he gains absolutly nothing over what he started with, and has lost time off school, personal stress, the loss of friends and the goodwill of teachers until graduation. Sounds like losing to me. The message is clear: Don't fuck with the powers that be. It's a valuable lesson though, and one everyone needs to learn sooner or later. Don't fight the injustices of the world unless you are willing to become a martyr.
I'd settle for either.
I work at a school. I wish we had the first attitude, because a lot of our pupils are worthless little shits. But, being British, our attitude is more 'Do as we ask you, or we'll have to tell you again.' Sort of like the UN. There is no fear of the staff, so the pupils run riot.
Though used as a punishment, it doesn't really feel like one for the student who gets time to sit at home and play computer games. It's used as a way to get rid of unruly students who disrupt the teaching or pose a risk of violence to others, and as a way to make sure the parent knows very well just how much trouble that pupil is in.
Whenever I see mention of 'positive moral tone' or similar wording, I always read them as 'excuse to stick our noses into other peoples' business.'
No, he learning a much more valuable lesson: If authority wants to screw you, bend over and drop your pants. If you fight back, they'll just make it all the harder on you - and even if you win, you lose.
Schiavo was a special case - it went Political. It was in the best interests of a few politicians to milk her for every vote she was worth. End-of-life issues are a great thing for that - they allow for a tremendous amount of grandstanding, and yet will only actually directly effect a vanishingly tiny number of people.
Purgatory? No, it's a deadly sin. Straight to Hell.
There is one possible loophole. In theory, a deadly sin can be confessed like any other - but it's obviously impossible in suicide. Almost. If you used some form of slow-acting suicide like a drug overdose, then you could confess the sin before it takes effect. The tricky part is getting genuine repentance. Some use of drugs may be required to provide a temporary mood lift or pain reduction to make sure you genuinely regret the suicide. It'd be tricky, depending on predicting mood changes and timeing of drugs, but it might be doable.
On a more practical side, those catholic things do matter - they run quite a few hospitals, and those hospitals are required to follow the church teachings. That means if you're in a Catholic hospital, even in a state that permits assisted suicide, you arn't getting it. They just won't sign the paperwork, though they'll transfer you to a hospital that will.
I find it amusing that the 9/11 attack killed slightly more people than died in one month of traffic fatalities in the US* - but you don't see anywhere near as much fuss being made over the 9/11 attack the US suffers every month on the roads.
*It'd be slightly less these days - more cars, more deaths. When it comes to death, people have no sense of proportion.
Sometimes add 'must move to another hospital first.' Many hospitals just refuse to permit their doctors to sign the paperwork under any circumstances.
Government, and religion. This is slashdot, where we blame religion for everything, but this time that is where the blame belongs. There's a lot of superstitious thought around - people who think human life is something magical and supernatural, which must be sustained by any means until the very last moment.
Do not underestimate the power of twats. They only need a single report to take out of context, and they have their excuse. Just look at the antivax movement. They got exactly one study linking vaccination to autism, and that was withdrawn some years later with the researcher's in disgrace. There are hundreds of studies showing no link. And yet the anti-vax movement is still going strong, driven by powerful appeals to fear.