I like to use a drawing program for drawing, and paste the result in my wordprocessor; I don't have a need for drawing capabilities in my wordprocessor.
Where most applications are headed is not to include drawing capabilities in the wordprocessor but instead to embed the drawing program in the wordprocessor. It's not bloat, it's just integration. In fact it could reduce bloat because the wordprocessor may no longer need to understand the drawing format. The comment that started this thread was complaining about web browsing features in a file manager. Nautilus doesn't duplicate the web browsers functionality, it integrates the browser (Mozilla). Ideally, if all the interfaces were standardized you should be able to embed any web browser (which supports the relevant standards). All it means is that you don't have to open a new window to browse. This sort of thing is more modular than traditional architectures.
Of course. I think it'd be a nice option that would be more palatable to many people than another password (I can't even remember how many passwords I have). Options are the thing - either get the user to enter a passphrase or read it off some media. The USB memory key thing is just more convienient than a floppy.
The real reason portal sites die, is that there useless.
I think the fundamental problem for portal sites is that they try to be all things to everyone and that's simply not possible. If I want to search I go to Google. If I want news I come here, or if I want something more general I go to NewsHub. If I want stock quotes I go to Nasdaq. I don't understand why portal operators think I would want it all on one page.
... arcatexture...
That's got to be the most impressive misspelling of architecture that I've ever seen.
Napster has been accused of contributory and vicarious copyright infringement, not direct copyright infringement. Contributory infringement because their service clearly contributes to the users infringement. Vicarious because Napster have the right and ability to supervise the service and a direct financial interest in the infringing activities. More detail can be found in this excellent article from EFF, which was mentioned in a Slashdot story a week or so ago. As far as it applies to Napster the court ruled that the contributory infringement law means that if notified by the copyright owner Napster must take reasonable steps to block further distribution of the material.
That passphrase dialog keeps anyone else from using your system to read/send encrypted mail.
It's their for a reason, your security!
What would be more acceptable would be a key on some sort of portable storage device, something like IBM's USB Memory Key. It's not as secure as a passphrase but it'd be good enough for most people. And it's a model everyone's used to with credit cards and door keys.
All genetic engineering is, in the final analysis, is a more precise method of breeding things for desired characteristics.
That is not true. There is no way to naturally bread luminescent fish genes into a moth. Genetic engineering goes beyond what is possible with selective- and cross-breeding. And that's where the danger is; who knows for sure how that fish gene is going to interact with the moth genes.
The recent discovery that humans have far fewer genes than anticipated is a warning. Far more characteristics are determined by the interaction of multiple genes than by a single gene and we don't understand those interactions.
Sounds like the time the British, concerned about the rising levels of malaria, used DDT to kill all the mosquitos in the Congo area.
The argument against DDT is not as clear cut as I thought. Check out this article from The Economist.
Here's another example of the sort of screwup that occurs when we mess with the ecosystem: Cane Toads where introduced into Australia to eliminate some sort of insect pest. They are now the pest. They breed like rabbits and are poisonous.
There is a rough assumption that every time you rip off a song or an article or a book, the only people you're hurting are rich beyond your own wildest dreams anyway.
That's not the way I see it. For me, when I "rip off" stuff it's usually because of one of two reasons: unhappiness with the "official" publication, or because I want the increased convenience of the digital form. In the case of music I've often found myself looking for one particular song. I'm never going to buy the album and it's usually virtually impossible to sind the single. In the case of books and articles it's usually full text search that I'm looking for. I've never felt the need to download fiction but I can think of cases were I might (Cryptonomicon springs to mind). I'd still buy the book if I liked it, and I rather have a book to read anyway.
I understand why Harlan is pissed but I really don't think this is costing him anything (other than what it's costing him to sue). He'd do better to try to offer the service himself in some way, and not at ridiculous prices.
Is Emily writing this in 1994 and posting it now??
That's the impression I got. I don't know how she came by her experiences but they sure aren't anything like mine. Painful installs? Not these days. I had far more trouble with Win2000 than I've had with Linux for a long time. Win98 on a laptop running Office 2000 and she complains about the speed and stability of StarOffice on Linux? I've never been about to keep a machine running W98 for more than a few months (and I'm not talking continuous uptime here). It just seems to self-destruct. If I had to run a MS OS on a laptop it'd be 2000 or nothing.
However out of all this, I think we did find what Linux desperately does need: a JOURNALIST-NEWBIE FAQ. We'll make that a big button on startup, and burn them a special CD. Maybe then they'll click the WORKSTATION button and get the special JOURNALIST packages that magically detects which ONE software program they wanted.
That's exactly it. She wants a distribution which makes all the choices for her. Well I don't. I wan't Emacs. I wan't to be able to choose a window manager and GUI toolkit. I want to pick which services my servers provide during the install and not have to remove the unwanted ones later. Most of all I want to know what's going where (there are very few programs I install under Windows where I use the "typical" option - I always want to know what's being installed and where it's going).
And another problem I have with this article is the complete lack of logic. For example:
Microsoft knows what I know: Linux is not a threat.
... Linux is going to be meat for the grill once Microsoft finally gets around to paying attention to it. (And no, it hasn?t yet. It will.)
And I'm not even going to get into the rant about how all Linux programmers hate standards. And the "moon language" thing... yeah... she should know, sounds like she's living on the moon. She does have some good points but most of it unreasoned rubbish.
You become the owner of the plastic disc, but not it's content. What you really pay for, is the right(a lisence) to view the content of the plastic disc.
There's no license involved. Have you ever signed or seen a license when you've bought a DVD or a CD (other than software)? You become the owner of the disc, you don't become the copyright owner of the content. That means you can't copy the content without permission from the copyright owner (and they won't give it to you). It's really no different to owning a book, except the DVD CCA have tried to enforce the copyright protection with technology.
SQL Server is the fastest database server in the world.
That's impossible to determine from the TPC benchmarks because the hardware is too varied. It's even worse than the SPEC benchmarks. TPC numbers are only useful for evaluating the specific setups they've measured and there aren't many of those.
For example, compare the top result (Compaq/Win2K/SQLS2000) with the fifth result (IBM/AIX4.3.3/Oracle8.1.7). Both systems cost around $10M. The Compaq cluster scores about 2.3 times higher than the IBM system. The Compaq cluster is 24 8x700MHz PIII Xeon servers (192 processors). The IBM server is a single 24x600MHz RS64 IV (24 processors). With that sort of hardware disparity it is impossible to make any judgement on the software performance at all. The Compaq setup has much better price performance but you can't attribute that to the software. The second place DB2 cluster you mentioned is a 32 machine 4x700MHz PIII Xeon setup (128 processors) and scores much closer to the Compaq setup which also points to hardware as being the major factor.
The most interesting bit is that the software for the Compaq setup costs just over $3M, with the software for the IBM system being under $1M. Virtually all the software costs are in the DBMSs. If you have license 192 copies SQL Server is not cheap.
To expand your pathetic little horizon a bit, I go to class and I administer computer systems -- and I need to be contacted when systems need help. That's why I pay for the cell service. If my phone vibrating, and my taking it out of my pocket to read the message
So why didn't you get a pager or something like this. These devices are supposed to be unaffected by this sort of blocking. If you have a phone instead then clearly you mean to talk. I agree that the "quiet zone" idea where the phone is switched to vibrate is a better idea, but I don't see how your situation justifies not allowing cellphone blocking.
And I hope someday the doctor YOU need for some emergency is in class where his phone has been blocked.
Doctors have a contractual obligation to be contactable. If they go somewhere where they are not contactable then they will be responsible for the results. In what way does the case of the doctor going into a blocked area differ from doctor going out of signal range?
The problem is the behavior that is associated with them - rude and inconsiderate when applied to theatres and fancy restaurants, potentially dangerous when coupled with moving vehicles.
To actually get back on topic, though, jamming is not likely to be the answer, as other people have pointed out. The problem is behavioural, not technological, and we therefore should not be looking for technological solutions to it.
The current prefered technique for dealing with behavioural problems is to legislate. But if people don't think it's much of a problem that won't stop them (e.g. speeding, jaywalking, smoking in non-smoking areas). A technological solution is more effective. Which is why the MPAA demanded DVD copy-protection.
P.S. Why in hell did the original parent in this thread get 3, Funny, and my reply to it 3, Insightful? Neither was either.
The music companies are never going to be able to make an effective list. I know that a) the songs that I rip for personal use (legal under fair use) are either named wierdly by RealJukebox, or named by me with filenames like 'somegoddamnsong.mp3' because I'm lazy. This is going to be a serious thorn in the side of the record companies. YAY!
The RIAA won't care about that sort of thing because no one else is going to be able to find what they're looking for anyhow. It's not like anyone will ever search for 'somegoddamnsong'.
International law usually means international treaties. Specifically these days it means the sorts of things that the UN handles. See the UN's page on international law, for example. Other examples include the Warsaw Convention which you'll find mentioned on the back of most airline tickets and copyright treaties like the Berne Convention.
The thing to realise here is that Sealand doesn't need to be party to these treaties - it's what England and the U.S. are party to that counts. Which is why neither of them would be able to go in with force.
Note however, they get all their power and internet connection from nearby countries, who would be entirely within their rights to switch off the connection if Havenco start doing something they disagree with.
First they'd have to prove that Sealand wasn't a country. If it is a country then Britain would be on pretty dodgy ground as far as international law went.
The UK extended her territorial waters a few years back, so it's no longer outside them (as it was in '67).
And there's the rub. It was an abandoned platform in international waters. Britain later extended their territorial waters to encompass it. The British government has probably left it too long to get rid off the occupiers by normal means (i.e. trespass laws). Plus there was that court case that was thrown out because the judge decided he didn't have jurisdiction.
the ISPs they are connecting to aren't situated there, and will be possible to reach via courts in the countries they operate in.
The likes of AOL Time Warner would have
pretty strong concerns about a case that sets the precedent of ISPs being legally responsible for the data they carry. I'd say the RIAA would have to try to throw money at the link operators to drop the connection (cable to England, I believe).
Sealand has lasted thus far because there's been no good reason to take it over. The RIAA is not going to let Napster get away, though, and they'll hire government agents to destroy any Sealand operation that Napster might try to start.
Sealand is a fort. Manned by people who arguably have the right to retaliate with force (they've fired at English naval vessels before). Which means the RIAA would have to go in with force. Can you imagine what would happen if someone was killed and it was linked back to the RIAA? They'd get crucified.
The RIAA would have to fight in the courts, which could be a tricky business given Sealand's as undetermined status as a country. Their best bet would be to go after the Canadian who owns the server in Canada. Shut him down and their problem goes away.
It's about time Napster rolled over and admitted that they can't fight money.
I guess you didn't read the article either. This is some guy wanting to set up a clone server. It has nothing to do with Napster (the company) at all.
From what I've heard, MSIE on Macintosh is the most standard-compliant browser out there, which is not easy to do.
IE5 on the Mac was the most standards-compliant browser. That title now belongs to Mozilla. See this article from the Web Standards Project (they made the claim about Mac IE5 in the first place).
Care to product the trademark registration number then? I couldn't find it using tess.uspto.gov. Not that I tried very hard, just searched for "sting gordon" (yes, I did know what his real name is, thus the quotes).
The point is that users are banned on the basis of song titles without any verification of actual infringement. That's the same as jailing someone for grand theft auto because the car they're driving matches the description of one that was stolen. It's wrong and unjust no question about it.
Slashdot Mirror
Of course. I think it'd be a nice option that would be more palatable to many people than another password (I can't even remember how many passwords I have). Options are the thing - either get the user to enter a passphrase or read it off some media. The USB memory key thing is just more convienient than a floppy.
Napster has been accused of contributory and vicarious copyright infringement, not direct copyright infringement. Contributory infringement because their service clearly contributes to the users infringement. Vicarious because Napster have the right and ability to supervise the service and a direct financial interest in the infringing activities. More detail can be found in this excellent article from EFF, which was mentioned in a Slashdot story a week or so ago. As far as it applies to Napster the court ruled that the contributory infringement law means that if notified by the copyright owner Napster must take reasonable steps to block further distribution of the material.
The recent discovery that humans have far fewer genes than anticipated is a warning. Far more characteristics are determined by the interaction of multiple genes than by a single gene and we don't understand those interactions.
Here's another example of the sort of screwup that occurs when we mess with the ecosystem: Cane Toads where introduced into Australia to eliminate some sort of insect pest. They are now the pest. They breed like rabbits and are poisonous.
I understand why Harlan is pissed but I really don't think this is costing him anything (other than what it's costing him to sue). He'd do better to try to offer the service himself in some way, and not at ridiculous prices.
And another problem I have with this article is the complete lack of logic. For example:
And I'm not even going to get into the rant about how all Linux programmers hate standards. And the "moon language" thing ... yeah ... she should know, sounds like she's living on the moon. She does have some good points but most of it unreasoned rubbish.
For example, compare the top result (Compaq/Win2K/SQLS2000) with the fifth result (IBM/AIX4.3.3/Oracle8.1.7). Both systems cost around $10M. The Compaq cluster scores about 2.3 times higher than the IBM system. The Compaq cluster is 24 8x700MHz PIII Xeon servers (192 processors). The IBM server is a single 24x600MHz RS64 IV (24 processors). With that sort of hardware disparity it is impossible to make any judgement on the software performance at all. The Compaq setup has much better price performance but you can't attribute that to the software. The second place DB2 cluster you mentioned is a 32 machine 4x700MHz PIII Xeon setup (128 processors) and scores much closer to the Compaq setup which also points to hardware as being the major factor.
The most interesting bit is that the software for the Compaq setup costs just over $3M, with the software for the IBM system being under $1M. Virtually all the software costs are in the DBMSs. If you have license 192 copies SQL Server is not cheap.
Welcome to the wonderful word of Satire.
The thing to realise here is that Sealand doesn't need to be party to these treaties - it's what England and the U.S. are party to that counts. Which is why neither of them would be able to go in with force.
The RIAA would have to fight in the courts, which could be a tricky business given Sealand's as undetermined status as a country. Their best bet would be to go after the Canadian who owns the server in Canada. Shut him down and their problem goes away.
I guess you didn't read the article either. This is some guy wanting to set up a clone server. It has nothing to do with Napster (the company) at all.Care to product the trademark registration number then? I couldn't find it using tess.uspto.gov. Not that I tried very hard, just searched for "sting gordon" (yes, I did know what his real name is, thus the quotes).
The point is that users are banned on the basis of song titles without any verification of actual infringement. That's the same as jailing someone for grand theft auto because the car they're driving matches the description of one that was stolen. It's wrong and unjust no question about it.