I don't use adblock, only noscript. But even after giving permission to all javascript sources and to run the plugin the screen stays empty. Konqueror works flawlessly (like suggested else where).
I like SF in general, but the only thing firefly did for me was make me sleepy. I can't remember seeing a compelete episode on TV without falling asleep (being aired around 2100). I watched the first 3 episodes on DVD and then simply gave up (never bothered to watch Serenity)
For me the '"the hit cult TV show" Firefly' is just a plain TV show that failed to grab the attention of (enough) viewers.
Well flash is a standard by itself I suppose (and has a rather larger installed base (according to macromedia offcourse)).
But even when I enabled it for this possibly interesting site, all I got was a blank area where the content was supposed to be (with flash 7.0.x installed).
If you want cutting edge Debian/stable is not for you. Debian/unstable might be.
I guess this is in TFA somewhere but stable/unstable in the name has no relation to the stability of the running machines/processes. It reflects the versioning of installed software.
IMHO: -stable: mainly on servers (trying not to have to roll your own (updated) packages) and corporate desktops. -unstable: user desktop (reminder: sometimes software/packages are broken, test when mission critical before updating) -testing: anything inbetween
The "marketing factor" you mention is BS, harddisk manifacturers are just about the only ones out there who use the correct SI prefixes for storage devices.
My guess is that the parent is trying to point out that Linux has filesystems like JFFS2, which try to prevent wear of sectors: http://sourceware.org/jffs2/jffs2-html/
BS. Read the complete EUCD (and your local implementation of it if applicable). Chapter III article 6 point 1 makes no distinction between personal or other uses.
PROTECTION OF TECHNOLOGICAL MEASURES AND RIGHTS-MANAGEMENT INFORMATION
Article 6
Obligations as to technological measures
2. Member States shall provide adequate legal protection against the manufacture, import, distribution, sale, rental, advertisement for sale or rental, or possession for commercial purposes of devices, products or components or the provision of services which:
(a) are promoted, advertised or marketed for the purpose of circumvention of, or
(b) have only a limited commercially significant purpose or use other than to circumvent, or
(c) are primarily designed, produced, adapted or performed for the purpose of enabling or facilitating the circumvention of,
any effective technological measures.
3. For the purposes of this Directive, the expression "technological measures" means any technology, device or component that, in the normal course of its operation, is designed to prevent or restrict acts, in respect of works or other subject-matter, which are not authorised by the rightholder of any copyright or any right related to copyright as provided for by law or the sui generis right provided for in Chapter III of Directive 96/9/EC. Technological measures shall be deemed "effective" where the use of a protected work or other subject-matter is controlled by the rightholders through application of an access control or protection process, such as encryption, scrambling or other transformation of the work or other subject-matter or a copy control mechanism, which achieves the protection objective.
Well, if you are not an american then my guess would be that you are used (or were if you are in the US now) to a much more consumer friendly "copyright" laws (if any).
I had to work on a HP laptop early 2005. The keyboard was horrible it would simply ignore keypressed or even forget that a key was down at all (very noticable in games when using cursor keys). I don't remember what model it was though.
Your statement about the "notes of programming" is very weak. Function calls and names say nothing about functionality, compare the same functionality in different (programming) languages and notation styles.
But this point is irrelevant anyway. There are enough examples out there that provide similar non-compatible functionality. There are many file archivers in use, some are even compatible (most support zip), some a derivative of an other (gnutar and bsdtar might share code), some simply a similar implementation of the same algorithm (LZ in gzip and compress).
Again: similar and derivative are totally different in copyright: -Taking a sample and reusing it is making a derivative work. -Creating a work to reproduce the function of an other work makes it a similar work.
Duh! Using a sample makes it a derivative. It's exactly the same as reusing code (IMHO). I was thinking along the lines of GNU tar vs. BSD tar. They do exactly the same without being a derivative in the sense of copyrightlaws.
And there are even places in the world where things are worse, in the Netherlands the plans were to discontinue analog broadcast per 2006-01-01 without there being a DVB-T alternative for 80% of the population, forcing people to expensive satelite equipment and monthly fees. Luckily this got postponed till 2006-04-01.
"Popular musicians make no money on their content, they usually make money at their shows."
Without copyright laws nobody would make anything from their content. It's the only protection a creator of content has.
Your rant is against the current distributors. Copyright laws don't stop any distributor from adopting your views. For example you might think that the content of a cd is redistributable for free (both gratis and libre). Hell, that is even happening right now.
Take away copyright laws and you would take away the rights of others who disagree with your views.
A similar product doesn't have to be a derivative under copyright law. It isn't a derivative is the only thing in common is the function. But even then applicable copyright laws often define the legality of reverse enginering to make a compatible product.
Slashdot Mirror
Ever heard of Stockholm syndrom :)
Duh! That was while it was still supported by MS:
x =17&y=7&p1=3071x =21&y=10&p1=3223
r t/en-US/gp_lifecycle_top_2_8_19_05.gifr t/en-US/gp_lifecycle_top_1_8_18_05.gif
2k pro: http://support.microsoft.com/lifecycle/?LN=en-us&
XP pro: http://support.microsoft.com/lifecycle/?LN=en-us&
http://support.microsoft.com/gp/lifepolicy
perdy pictures of new lifecycle:
http://support.microsoft.com/library/images/suppo
http://support.microsoft.com/library/images/suppo
I don't use adblock, only noscript. But even after giving permission to all javascript sources and to run the plugin the screen stays empty. Konqueror works flawlessly (like suggested else where).
So what is in the else?
I like SF in general, but the only thing firefly did for me was make me sleepy. I can't remember seeing a compelete episode on TV without falling asleep (being aired around 2100). I watched the first 3 episodes on DVD and then simply gave up (never bothered to watch Serenity)
For me the '"the hit cult TV show" Firefly' is just a plain TV show that failed to grab the attention of (enough) viewers.
Well flash is a standard by itself I suppose (and has a rather larger installed base (according to macromedia offcourse)).
But even when I enabled it for this possibly interesting site, all I got was a blank area where the content was supposed to be (with flash 7.0.x installed).
If you want cutting edge Debian/stable is not for you. Debian/unstable might be.
I guess this is in TFA somewhere but stable/unstable in the name has no relation to the stability of the running machines/processes. It reflects the versioning of installed software.
IMHO:
-stable: mainly on servers (trying not to have to roll your own (updated) packages) and corporate desktops.
-unstable: user desktop (reminder: sometimes software/packages are broken, test when mission critical before updating)
-testing: anything inbetween
Khaaaaaaaan!
The "marketing factor" you mention is BS, harddisk manifacturers are just about the only ones out there who use the correct SI prefixes for storage devices.
My guess is that the parent is trying to point out that Linux has filesystems like JFFS2, which try to prevent wear of sectors: http://sourceware.org/jffs2/jffs2-html/
BS. Read the complete EUCD (and your local implementation of it if applicable). Chapter III article 6 point 1 makes no distinction between personal or other uses.
Welcome to the EUCD: it's illegal to circumvent copyprotection mechanisms.
i !celexplus!prod!CELEXnumdoc&numdoc=32001L0029&lg=E N
Current DVDs with regioncodes and CSS might be exempt since they were no longer effective before ratification of the EUCD.
You might want to read (and your local implementation of it)
http://europa.eu.int/smartapi/cgi/sga_doc?smartap
CHAPTER III
PROTECTION OF TECHNOLOGICAL MEASURES AND RIGHTS-MANAGEMENT INFORMATION
Article 6
Obligations as to technological measures
2. Member States shall provide adequate legal protection against the manufacture, import, distribution, sale, rental, advertisement for sale or rental, or possession for commercial purposes of devices, products or components or the provision of services which:
(a) are promoted, advertised or marketed for the purpose of circumvention of, or
(b) have only a limited commercially significant purpose or use other than to circumvent, or
(c) are primarily designed, produced, adapted or performed for the purpose of enabling or facilitating the circumvention of,
any effective technological measures.
3. For the purposes of this Directive, the expression "technological measures" means any technology, device or component that, in the normal course of its operation, is designed to prevent or restrict acts, in respect of works or other subject-matter, which are not authorised by the rightholder of any copyright or any right related to copyright as provided for by law or the sui generis right provided for in Chapter III of Directive 96/9/EC. Technological measures shall be deemed "effective" where the use of a protected work or other subject-matter is controlled by the rightholders through application of an access control or protection process, such as encryption, scrambling or other transformation of the work or other subject-matter or a copy control mechanism, which achieves the protection objective.
But that is not important right now.
Last year I had to work on a HP laptop with XP pro on it. One could get it to BSOD by simply unplugging the firewire dvdburner.
Well, if you are not an american then my guess would be that you are used (or were if you are in the US now) to a much more consumer friendly "copyright" laws (if any).
I had to work on a HP laptop early 2005. The keyboard was horrible it would simply ignore keypressed or even forget that a key was down at all (very noticable in games when using cursor keys). I don't remember what model it was though.
No, parent is talking about "The Why of Fry": http://www.tv.com/futurama/the-why-of-fry/episode/ 165483/summary.html
The beginning of episode 1 of season 4 of the Family Guy:
http://onsnetis.boldlygoingnowhere.org/fg-401.avi
(playback only tested with mplayer and vlc)
I guess you never noticed bad interlacing in DVDs? You are either very lucky or need to have your eyes checked.
Your statement about the "notes of programming" is very weak. Function calls and names say nothing about functionality, compare the same functionality in different (programming) languages and notation styles.
But this point is irrelevant anyway. There are enough examples out there that provide similar non-compatible functionality. There are many file archivers in use, some are even compatible (most support zip), some a derivative of an other (gnutar and bsdtar might share code), some simply a similar implementation of the same algorithm (LZ in gzip and compress).
Again: similar and derivative are totally different in copyright:
-Taking a sample and reusing it is making a derivative work.
-Creating a work to reproduce the function of an other work makes it a similar work.
Duh! Using a sample makes it a derivative. It's exactly the same as reusing code (IMHO). I was thinking along the lines of GNU tar vs. BSD tar. They do exactly the same without being a derivative in the sense of copyrightlaws.
And there are even places in the world where things are worse, in the Netherlands the plans were to discontinue analog broadcast per 2006-01-01 without there being a DVB-T alternative for 80% of the population, forcing people to expensive satelite equipment and monthly fees. Luckily this got postponed till 2006-04-01.
Great, a bullshit filter builtin to the ODF exporter. Many readers would welcome that.
"Popular musicians make no money on their content, they usually make money at their shows."
Without copyright laws nobody would make anything from their content. It's the only protection a creator of content has.
Your rant is against the current distributors. Copyright laws don't stop any distributor from adopting your views. For example you might think that the content of a cd is redistributable for free (both gratis and libre). Hell, that is even happening right now.
Take away copyright laws and you would take away the rights of others who disagree with your views.
A similar product doesn't have to be a derivative under copyright law. It isn't a derivative is the only thing in common is the function. But even then applicable copyright laws often define the legality of reverse enginering to make a compatible product.
A long duration may make the creator of a succesful product "lazy". But it would certainly spur competitors to create a similar product.