Honestly, you're right. I forgot that there is a distinct difference between a good movie and a successful one plus the fact that they rarely go hand-in-hand in Hollywood.
You raise a very good point, honestly, but there's also the fact that Google wouldn't be obligated to serve anything to any browser other than their official one. I'll admit to being unknowledgeable as far as specifics of the LGPL or Mozilla Public License go, but I assume just because another program interacts with an open source project, it is not also forced to be open source.
If Google used some sort of simple authentication to make sure the client program was their official one before serving content, they'd be golden. Sure, it'd be bypassable, but doing so would likely be difficult enough to keep the average internet user from bothering with it, and this is ignoring the fact that google has thus far been damn good at delivering its advertisements just as part of the content, making it somewhat unlikely there would be separate and easily removed advertisements from any browser/OS/skynet they're building or thinking about building.
I just named it because it was the most popular I could think of as well as the first rendering engine that popped into my head.
Regardless, we're basically on the same page here. Why would Google shell out millions for a browser when so many cheaper opportunities are available? Even if Mozilla has some weaknesses compared to Opera, Google remains a publicly traded company and isn't going to just waste money. They'll go for whichever plan has the best return on their money (assuming they even have any interest in getting into the browser wars at the moment.)
The man's been married for a while now. By this point, slashdot is the only thing left in his life over which he has any control. I say we all turn a blind eye to a little editorializing from the man, considering it's the only way he can feel like one anymore.
Absurd rumor mongering at its best/worst. If Google really wanted to get into the browser arena, why wouldn't they just create their own based on the open (And most importantly, FREE) Gecko engine?
"You probably could have made a few changes like switching to 10.5:1 pistons and realized similar horsepower and higher mileage gains."
Call me crazy, but I sincerely doubt just going from 9:1 to 10.5:1 compression and remaining naturally aspirated would more than double his horsepower output like adding an extra 14.7 psi to the mix did. Gas mileage I can't comment on, but I know for a fact that to get 450 N/A hp out of a 302 requires a lot more than high compression pistons.
This seems relevant, and it's been on my mind for a while, so I might as well ask it here.
Does anyone here have a working understanding of how software patents came about in America, or how they got so out of hand? This one strikes me as particularly idiotic, being that they patented... wireless email.
Hell, I sent out an email a few minutes ago and I'm currently on a wireless LAN. Does that mean I or Yahoo! (technically) owe these fucks royalties?
that it's not what you do, it's how quick to market you are with your half-assed and inferior product so as to build as much mindshare with potential customers as possible.
Heavily practicing tasks allows one to perform them better and with more consistency than people who have never tried!
Has it yet been considered that humans aren't necessarily BAD at multitasking, but we're plenty of capable of training ourselves to be better at it? You know, much like we are with almost everything else that is a learned behavior.
Your story is interesting except for the fact that if you check out the wayback machine and load up the history for spider.com you find that since 1997 it's been owned by spider software, and remains that way. No goth porn.
But it's going to set a dangerous precedent if this clown wins. He wants damages? With a defective product, the company isn't liable for anything beyond replacing it, unless there's some signed contract prior to purchase in which the manufacturer guarantees certain things.
but I will say that your post is the equivalent of an ad hominem attack.
A slashdot poster attacked the legitimacy of Scientology, and instead of actually addressing his points, your post essentially said, "Yeah, scientology is crazy, but... Christianity is more crazy!"
I'm a relatively neutral observer in the whole religious escapades, and believe Scientology and Christianity to be on relatively equal planes of insanity, but for you to try to legitimize one by attacking the other is both hilarious and asinine.
Natural disasters are to be celebrated, not feared.
Naturally, it would be ridiculous to stand in the way of one and think you can change God's will, but that's the great thing about them: They function as a social cleanser that ignores the cries of sympathetic liberal faggots.
Nobody likes poor people. Nobody laments the death of retards. Nobody cries when black people die (especially when they're members of either/both previously mentioned groups). And with which groups of people do acts of god generally do away? Bingo.
The majority of us have been blessed with the means to avoid death by disaster. We build homes strong enough to withstand earthquakes. We use our cars to get out of the way of hurricanes. We don't FUCKING live on beaches where tidal waves are likely to wash ashore. But undesirables? What the government lacks the balls to do, God gets done.
So the next time you hear about ten-thousand darkies getting swept out to sea, don't shed a tear and donate to the Red Cross. Say a quick prayer and thank God for getting our welfare budget that much closer to balanced.
And the saddest part is instead of the editors taking the marginal amount of time necessary to just delete this story and instantly post the next in the queue when someone is helpful like you and points out their foible right away, they'll keep their thumbs up their asses like nothing is going on and ignore the issue.
OK, but that didn't really answer my question. What IP does Cisco have that's going to make their boxes superior to anyone elses? Otherwise they'll be "just another set-top box maker."
Slashdot Mirror
I didn't mean free as in beer.
"Digital Universe - The sort of free encyclopedia. Editable by some, and only after approval."
It sounds like they're basically going right back to the old model of encyclopedia authoring, and the only real difference is it's online.
Uh, Half Life 2 came out in November 2004.
Interesting article. How long until Wikipedia rips it off and claims it as their own?
Honestly, you're right. I forgot that there is a distinct difference between a good movie and a successful one plus the fact that they rarely go hand-in-hand in Hollywood.
A good script?
Good lord sweety, it was a light-hearted joke.
See if you can find a store that will let you trade in your mod points for a sense of humor.
You raise a very good point, honestly, but there's also the fact that Google wouldn't be obligated to serve anything to any browser other than their official one. I'll admit to being unknowledgeable as far as specifics of the LGPL or Mozilla Public License go, but I assume just because another program interacts with an open source project, it is not also forced to be open source.
If Google used some sort of simple authentication to make sure the client program was their official one before serving content, they'd be golden. Sure, it'd be bypassable, but doing so would likely be difficult enough to keep the average internet user from bothering with it, and this is ignoring the fact that google has thus far been damn good at delivering its advertisements just as part of the content, making it somewhat unlikely there would be separate and easily removed advertisements from any browser/OS/skynet they're building or thinking about building.
God I hate arguing hypotheticals.
I just named it because it was the most popular I could think of as well as the first rendering engine that popped into my head.
Regardless, we're basically on the same page here. Why would Google shell out millions for a browser when so many cheaper opportunities are available? Even if Mozilla has some weaknesses compared to Opera, Google remains a publicly traded company and isn't going to just waste money. They'll go for whichever plan has the best return on their money (assuming they even have any interest in getting into the browser wars at the moment.)
The man's been married for a while now. By this point, slashdot is the only thing left in his life over which he has any control. I say we all turn a blind eye to a little editorializing from the man, considering it's the only way he can feel like one anymore.
Absurd rumor mongering at its best/worst. If Google really wanted to get into the browser arena, why wouldn't they just create their own based on the open (And most importantly, FREE) Gecko engine?
Call me crazy, but I sincerely doubt just going from 9:1 to 10.5:1 compression and remaining naturally aspirated would more than double his horsepower output like adding an extra 14.7 psi to the mix did. Gas mileage I can't comment on, but I know for a fact that to get 450 N/A hp out of a 302 requires a lot more than high compression pistons.
This seems relevant, and it's been on my mind for a while, so I might as well ask it here.
Does anyone here have a working understanding of how software patents came about in America, or how they got so out of hand? This one strikes me as particularly idiotic, being that they patented... wireless email.
Hell, I sent out an email a few minutes ago and I'm currently on a wireless LAN. Does that mean I or Yahoo! (technically) owe these fucks royalties?
Given the average indicated intelligence of most people with modpoints, I propose we make defending a post by it's moderation a new Godwin's law.
:o)
(How long will it take for this to get modded down as a troll?
I've got a 160 gig HD collecting dust in my closet.
Can I mail it to you and get a copy of your music collection? Seriously.
that it's not what you do, it's how quick to market you are with your half-assed and inferior product so as to build as much mindshare with potential customers as possible.
Unless you're Microsoft.
Heavily practicing tasks allows one to perform them better and with more consistency than people who have never tried!
Has it yet been considered that humans aren't necessarily BAD at multitasking, but we're plenty of capable of training ourselves to be better at it? You know, much like we are with almost everything else that is a learned behavior.
Your story is interesting except for the fact that if you check out the wayback machine and load up the history for spider.com you find that since 1997 it's been owned by spider software, and remains that way. No goth porn.
But it's going to set a dangerous precedent if this clown wins. He wants damages? With a defective product, the company isn't liable for anything beyond replacing it, unless there's some signed contract prior to purchase in which the manufacturer guarantees certain things.
but I will say that your post is the equivalent of an ad hominem attack.
A slashdot poster attacked the legitimacy of Scientology, and instead of actually addressing his points, your post essentially said, "Yeah, scientology is crazy, but... Christianity is more crazy!"
I'm a relatively neutral observer in the whole religious escapades, and believe Scientology and Christianity to be on relatively equal planes of insanity, but for you to try to legitimize one by attacking the other is both hilarious and asinine.
Smells more like failure.
Natural disasters are to be celebrated, not feared.
Naturally, it would be ridiculous to stand in the way of one and think you can change God's will, but that's the great thing about them: They function as a social cleanser that ignores the cries of sympathetic liberal faggots.
Nobody likes poor people. Nobody laments the death of retards. Nobody cries when black people die (especially when they're members of either/both previously mentioned groups). And with which groups of people do acts of god generally do away? Bingo.
The majority of us have been blessed with the means to avoid death by disaster. We build homes strong enough to withstand earthquakes. We use our cars to get out of the way of hurricanes. We don't FUCKING live on beaches where tidal waves are likely to wash ashore. But undesirables? What the government lacks the balls to do, God gets done.
So the next time you hear about ten-thousand darkies getting swept out to sea, don't shed a tear and donate to the Red Cross. Say a quick prayer and thank God for getting our welfare budget that much closer to balanced.
http://george-harrison.info/
Yes, I am going to hell.
And the saddest part is instead of the editors taking the marginal amount of time necessary to just delete this story and instantly post the next in the queue when someone is helpful like you and points out their foible right away, they'll keep their thumbs up their asses like nothing is going on and ignore the issue.
OK, but that didn't really answer my question. What IP does Cisco have that's going to make their boxes superior to anyone elses? Otherwise they'll be "just another set-top box maker."