I won't post the bug number (bugzilla won't allow links from slashdot anyway), but it's already been fixed as of tonights builds, if I remember correctly.
To expect someone to be bound to the terms of a contract after a sale is ridiculous. Either it is a sale or it isn't. If it's a sale, then I own it and can do with it as I see fit. If it's not a sale then calling it that is a misrepresentation. Call it a rental or a lease, because that's what it amounts to.
If you or I sold someone a car, house or any other property then stuck a contract in the buyer's face and told them "sign it or give me back the property" we'd be a laughing stock, and no court in the world would consider the case. Why should software be any different. If Microsoft and other vendors expect end users to be bound by the terms of a contract they should be required to present the contract in advance of the purchase, period.
"Where were you in '62?"
on
Byte Wars
·
· Score: 2
Nice review, but American Graffiti was set in 1962, not the 50's.
I really like to verify signatures on packages and tarballs when available, especially for tools like SSH. I've looked all over the place (including a couple public key servers) and haven't been able to find the signer's public key. Any ideas where it might be hiding?
I can't speak for "most people," but we began using OSS because it was more stable and capable, and allowed us more freedom to express solutions to problems than Microsoft's offerings. Cost wasn't even considered.
Say what you like about "ease of use," but I've found that for most of my needs, a real shell beats the hell out of a mouse.
I vaguely recall that the Dialogic boards we used to build voice mail systems in the 1980s could recognize the three-tone Operator Intercept, sometimes, if they were properly 'tuned', but it was a crap shoot.
Most of the work I was involved with was answer-only, but we did do an Emergency Notification system once, and one of the problems was recognizing the Intercepts; most OI calls just came up as 'no answer', which bothered me to no end, because a channel was tied up waiting for an answer on a line that had already indicated there would be no answer.
I said all that to say that unless the technology used to build these automated nagging systems has improved significantly in its ability to recognize OIs, your results won't be very consistent.
Damn right. And you would deserve to be prosecuted. I'd have no hesitation on throwing your ass into court.
Bottom line, I don't want you or ANYONE regardless of their intentions modifying my computer. Chances are you would fuck something up while trying to "help me".
Just like you wouldn't walk into someone's house just because they forgot to lock the door, there should be zero tolerance for people breaking into computers for whatever motive.
Excuse me, but I don't recall having observed my neighbor's house walking over to my house and checking to see if the front door was locked, or tampering with the locks so that other intruders can get in, then causing my house to behave in the same way.
I think I can safely say that if I saw your house walk over to my house and start jiggling the locks, your house would be toast.
Speaking from personal experience, I can assure you that some phone companies will require you to pay for a business line if they find out you're using a personal line for business. The reason for this is probably something to do with allocation of resources, but I'll leave it for the telecomheads to fill in the blanks.
We should be concentrating on doing what we do best - writing good code and sharing it with each other. We made it this far by concentrating on that - writing good software.
I couldn't agree more. It was the chance to "learn by seeing how other people were doing" that drew me to Linux (and other Free projects) in the first place. I've learned more in the last five years or so than I could ever have learned using closed source software.
One of the great benefits of open source is that when I have a problem with a program, instead of wasting my time clicking around on menus and reading useless, cryptic error codes, I can dig into the code and find the problem. With Open Source, problem solving becomes a learning experience, not just time wasted clicking around trying to coerce crappy code into working and learning nothing useful even if I happen to stumble onto a solutoin.
I think what frightens Microsoft and their peers is that a generally superior development model has emerged that can reduce development costs and produce code that can help increase efficiency and cut costs for end users. Eventually this development model will result in a market shift away from closed source software that will make the clash over the business model concepts moot.
It has always been understood that a link appearing in an HTML document implies that the author wishes to offer the user the opportunity to "follow" the link in order to find more information related to that word. This invitation is based upon the meaning attached to the word by the author. The author establishes this relationship knowing that it will serve his particular interests, whatever they may be. Software that adds link relationships that the original author has not explicitly defined changes or alters the meaning of the content and could very easily establish relationships that would be harmful to the author's interests (others have already made this case with the "Acme Widget Co. site having links to ABC Widgets, Inc.'s site inserted" example).
The descriptions of the implementation that I've read make this feature sound a lot sexier than your run-of-the-mill hyperlink. I imagine that your average luser would be inclined to use the Smart Tag links rather than the less attractive standard links. This will lead to confusion on the part of users, which will result in lost traffic (and in the case of corporate sites, lost business) for web publishers. It's easy to imagine that a user who didn't understand the difference between the two types of links would find most web sites virtually worthless since instead of allowing him to follow a series of links to gather increasingly detailed information on a particular subject, he would be lead through a series of sites with little relationship to each other or to the information has was seeking in the first place.
The basic idea, looking at the content and providing the user with links to sites with more information, is a good one, but the implementation is awful. Microsoft would scream bloody murder if a competitor's browser did the same thing with their content. Communicator and Mozilla offer a similar feature called "What's Related," but it lists related sites in a separate list. Something like this, which separates the third-party's links from the original content, would be much better since it wouldn't effectively add unintended relationships to the original author's content.
If I remember correctly, it was the coating used to protect the fabric of the outer envelope that was the real culprit. The formula used had characteristics similar to those of gun powder, making the fabric burn like a huge fuse.
As opposed to what, profit-seeking socialists who sell their constituents out for a quick chunk of campaign cash every time they get a chance, then lie their asses off about it and claim it's all for the children?
The problem is voters who think they can use the ballot box to elect themselves a free lunch and don't pay attention to what the weasels they elect are really doing. The pitch is "we're going to make the other guy pay your way," but guess who ends up paying? Everybody.
(But of course, a right-leaning group is going to go for a property claim (however wrongheaded) since property rights are central to their philosophy (however wrongheaded).)
/me chuckles. You haven't spent much time reading FreeRepublic.com, have you? FreeRepublic has been sued for embedding off-site content. They lost. Regular posters hold differing opinions on copyright and related issues, and range from statist GOP types to libertarians and a few stereotypes in-between. Your generalization definitely does not apply here.
"The seeds of regular expressions were plated in the early 1940s by two neurophysiologists, Warren McCulloch and Walter Pitts, who developed models of how they believed the nervous system worked at the neuron level.
"Regular expressions became a reality several years later when mathematician Stephen Kleene formally described these models in an algebra he called regular sets. He devised a simple notation to express these regular sets, and called them regular expressions.
I'm still looking for reprints of Kleene's papers on regular expressions, but they seem to be hard to come by. Maybe I'm just looking in the wrong places.
I don't know beans about physics, but I can tell you that the shot on the home page will probably put "follow" (sometimes referred to as "forward English") on the cue ball, as long as the player has a good stroke and a properly-shaped and well-chalked tip. This ball will tend to roll forward of the natural line after it makes contact with the object ball.
Just what makes you think that "the real world" is really "the real world?" Ever seen Thirteenth Floor?
Given the abilities of the Matrix to fabricate a convincing reality, how difficult would it be for it to one-up Neo and shunt him off into a sandbox where he can waste his time fighting phantom Agents?
What of the human bad guy hackers who really run the Matrix and whose abilities inside the Matrix far exceed Neo's? (think: Planet of the Apes XII or whatever it was).
Sequels call for bigger, badder, trickier villains,and I'm sure Matrix 2 and 3 won't dissapoint.
Re:Why does it need to write to the program dir? :
on
Send Some Mo' Zilla
·
· Score: 2
My bad, I should have said "Windows95isms," I was thinking 9x when I wrote that, it just didn't make it to my fingertips.
Re:Why does it need to write to the program dir? :
on
Send Some Mo' Zilla
·
· Score: 2
Not quite right. All components need write access to the binary directory. Check out the bugzilla entry linked in one of other posts in this thread for more information. This is a real problem for folks who want to install Mozilla once for several users and want a secure system.
I've always been a big mozilla advocate, but I'm disappointed that this error wasn't flagged as a showstopper the moment it was discovered. How many other "Windowsisms" have made their way into the Linux build?
Right, but this application doesn't "go haywire," per se, as in "crash and burn" and scribble all over other peoples' core--it uses up a resource gradually--there is a difference.
This isn't much different from an application that runs away and fills up the disk or allocates all available memory. Should Linux allow an application to deplete a resource without giving the admin a chance to kill the offender first? Probably not, and maybe this is one of those issues that will have to be addressed in the 2.5.0 tree. At any rate, Linux is still far more stable and dependable than that other OS.
You're missing something. If a moderator stumbles across a story after it's been posted for a while, he may have to read through several pages of posts before he finds one he wants to moderate. While the displayed score may be 1, it's possible that if the story is truly worthwhile, other moderators may already have bumped it up to four or five.
Any exceptionally good or bad post underneath an article that draws a lot of responses is probably going to be scored -1 or 5 within a matter of minutes.
Slashdot Mirror
mozilla is for developers, not "average users".
If you want hand-holding, use Netscape's release.
I won't post the bug number (bugzilla won't allow links from slashdot anyway), but it's already been fixed as of tonights builds, if I remember correctly.
To expect someone to be bound to the terms of a contract after a sale is ridiculous.
I should have written: "To expect someone to be bound to the terms of a contract not presented to them until after a sale..."
the house I just bought is part of the home owners association and part of the agreement to buy that house said that I agreed to join the HOA.
The agreement that was presented to you and that you signed before you handed over the money, correct?
To expect someone to be bound to the terms of a contract after a sale is ridiculous. Either it is a sale or it isn't. If it's a sale, then I own it and can do with it as I see fit. If it's not a sale then calling it that is a misrepresentation. Call it a rental or a lease, because that's what it amounts to.
If you or I sold someone a car, house or any other property then stuck a contract in the buyer's face and told them "sign it or give me back the property" we'd be a laughing stock, and no court in the world would consider the case. Why should software be any different. If Microsoft and other vendors expect end users to be bound by the terms of a contract they should be required to present the contract in advance of the purchase, period.
Nice review, but American Graffiti was set in 1962, not the 50's.
I really like to verify signatures on packages and tarballs when available, especially for tools like SSH. I've looked all over the place (including a couple public key servers) and haven't been able to find the signer's public key. Any ideas where it might be hiding?
Why not try responding like an adult instead of flaming? It doesn't hurt, I promise.
I can't speak for "most people," but we began using OSS because it was more stable and capable, and allowed us more freedom to express solutions to problems than Microsoft's offerings. Cost wasn't even considered.
Say what you like about "ease of use," but I've found that for most of my needs, a real shell beats the hell out of a mouse.
I vaguely recall that the Dialogic boards we used to build voice mail systems in the 1980s could recognize the three-tone Operator Intercept, sometimes, if they were properly 'tuned', but it was a crap shoot.
Most of the work I was involved with was answer-only, but we did do an Emergency Notification system once, and one of the problems was recognizing the Intercepts; most OI calls just came up as 'no answer', which bothered me to no end, because a channel was tied up waiting for an answer on a line that had already indicated there would be no answer.
I said all that to say that unless the technology used to build these automated nagging systems has improved significantly in its ability to recognize OIs, your results won't be very consistent.
Damn right. And you would deserve to be prosecuted. I'd have no hesitation on throwing your ass into court.
Bottom line, I don't want you or ANYONE regardless of their intentions modifying my computer. Chances are you would fuck something up while trying to "help me".
Just like you wouldn't walk into someone's house just because they forgot to lock the door, there should be zero tolerance for people breaking into computers for whatever motive.
Excuse me, but I don't recall having observed my neighbor's house walking over to my house and checking to see if the front door was locked, or tampering with the locks so that other intruders can get in, then causing my house to behave in the same way.
I think I can safely say that if I saw your house walk over to my house and start jiggling the locks, your house would be toast.
Speaking from personal experience, I can assure you that some phone companies will require you to pay for a business line if they find out you're using a personal line for business. The reason for this is probably something to do with allocation of resources, but I'll leave it for the telecomheads to fill in the blanks.
I couldn't agree more. It was the chance to "learn by seeing how other people were doing" that drew me to Linux (and other Free projects) in the first place. I've learned more in the last five years or so than I could ever have learned using closed source software.
One of the great benefits of open source is that when I have a problem with a program, instead of wasting my time clicking around on menus and reading useless, cryptic error codes, I can dig into the code and find the problem. With Open Source, problem solving becomes a learning experience, not just time wasted clicking around trying to coerce crappy code into working and learning nothing useful even if I happen to stumble onto a solutoin.
I think what frightens Microsoft and their peers is that a generally superior development model has emerged that can reduce development costs and produce code that can help increase efficiency and cut costs for end users. Eventually this development model will result in a market shift away from closed source software that will make the clash over the business model concepts moot.
Jesus, Taco, have an adult proofread before you post.
Yes, it absolutely does create a derivative work.
It has always been understood that a link appearing in an HTML document implies that the author wishes to offer the user the opportunity to "follow" the link in order to find more information related to that word. This invitation is based upon the meaning attached to the word by the author. The author establishes this relationship knowing that it will serve his particular interests, whatever they may be. Software that adds link relationships that the original author has not explicitly defined changes or alters the meaning of the content and could very easily establish relationships that would be harmful to the author's interests (others have already made this case with the "Acme Widget Co. site having links to ABC Widgets, Inc.'s site inserted" example).
The descriptions of the implementation that I've read make this feature sound a lot sexier than your run-of-the-mill hyperlink. I imagine that your average luser would be inclined to use the Smart Tag links rather than the less attractive standard links. This will lead to confusion on the part of users, which will result in lost traffic (and in the case of corporate sites, lost business) for web publishers. It's easy to imagine that a user who didn't understand the difference between the two types of links would find most web sites virtually worthless since instead of allowing him to follow a series of links to gather increasingly detailed information on a particular subject, he would be lead through a series of sites with little relationship to each other or to the information has was seeking in the first place.
The basic idea, looking at the content and providing the user with links to sites with more information, is a good one, but the implementation is awful. Microsoft would scream bloody murder if a competitor's browser did the same thing with their content. Communicator and Mozilla offer a similar feature called "What's Related," but it lists related sites in a separate list. Something like this, which separates the third-party's links from the original content, would be much better since it wouldn't effectively add unintended relationships to the original author's content.
If I remember correctly, it was the coating used to protect the fabric of the outer envelope that was the real culprit. The formula used had characteristics similar to those of gun powder, making the fabric burn like a huge fuse.
The problem is voters who think they can use the ballot box to elect themselves a free lunch and don't pay attention to what the weasels they elect are really doing. The pitch is "we're going to make the other guy pay your way," but guess who ends up paying? Everybody.
(But of course, a right-leaning group is going to go for a property claim (however wrongheaded) since property rights are central to their philosophy (however wrongheaded).)
We have Stephen Cole Kleene to thank for both recursion theory and regular expressions. According to a blurb in Friedl's Mastering Regular Expressions (pg. 60):
I'm still looking for reprints of Kleene's papers on regular expressions, but they seem to be hard to come by. Maybe I'm just looking in the wrong places.
I don't know beans about physics, but I can tell you that the shot on the home page will probably put "follow" (sometimes referred to as "forward English") on the cue ball, as long as the player has a good stroke and a properly-shaped and well-chalked tip. This ball will tend to roll forward of the natural line after it makes contact with the object ball.
All your racks are belong to us !!
Just what makes you think that "the real world" is really "the real world?" Ever seen Thirteenth Floor?
Given the abilities of the Matrix to fabricate a convincing reality, how difficult would it be for it to one-up Neo and shunt him off into a sandbox where he can waste his time fighting phantom Agents?
What of the human bad guy hackers who really run the Matrix and whose abilities inside the Matrix far exceed Neo's? (think: Planet of the Apes XII or whatever it was).
Sequels call for bigger, badder, trickier villains,and I'm sure Matrix 2 and 3 won't dissapoint.
My bad, I should have said "Windows95isms," I was thinking 9x when I wrote that, it just didn't make it to my fingertips.
Not quite right. All components need write access to the binary directory. Check out the bugzilla entry linked in one of other posts in this thread for more information. This is a real problem for folks who want to install Mozilla once for several users and want a secure system.
I've always been a big mozilla advocate, but I'm disappointed that this error wasn't flagged as a showstopper the moment it was discovered. How many other "Windowsisms" have made their way into the Linux build?
Right, but this application doesn't "go haywire," per se, as in "crash and burn" and scribble all over other peoples' core--it uses up a resource gradually--there is a difference.
This isn't much different from an application that runs away and fills up the disk or allocates all available memory. Should Linux allow an application to deplete a resource without giving the admin a chance to kill the offender first? Probably not, and maybe this is one of those issues that will have to be addressed in the 2.5.0 tree. At any rate, Linux is still far more stable and dependable than that other OS.
You're missing something. If a moderator stumbles across a story after it's been posted for a while, he may have to read through several pages of posts before he finds one he wants to moderate. While the displayed score may be 1, it's possible that if the story is truly worthwhile, other moderators may already have bumped it up to four or five.
Any exceptionally good or bad post underneath an article that draws a lot of responses is probably going to be scored -1 or 5 within a matter of minutes.