It seems a tad stupid to be going on about horrible branding and how "developers make horrible marketing people" when discussing the phenomenon that Ubuntu has been in the linux distro "market".
To me the whimsical code names just seem another indication it really is "Linux for Human beings". It's personable and if there's a need for a more 'corporate' then a simple 5.04 or whatever is right there.
Sensible: A truck "beeping" annoyingly when it reverses to alert people nearby that they might be in danger of being run over and horribly maimed or killed.
Stupid: A phone "beeping" annoyingly to alert people nearby that they might be in danger of "losing" some "intellectual property".
have you actually listened to the music being produced today? It is largely crap.
Why do people always trot out this stupid line?
Music has always been largely crap. The only difference with "older music" is that time has thankfully erased most of the crap from our conciousness.
If the 360 "flops" at launch then a lot of that may be because people have high(er) expectations of the PS3 and are prepared to wait and see before spending their hard earned cash.
Possibly the worst thing they could do in that situation is to launch a PS3 that doesn't meet those expectations. If you do that then the main reason people haven't been buying the 360 suddenly disappears. As long as people do appear willing to wait it would make sense to use that time to ensure your product is better placed than the competitors when buyers finally get to make their choice.
It's a balance of whether you will lose more customers who get tired of hanging on or will lose more through releasing a product that isn't clearly more attractive than the alternative.
One form of irony is incongruity between what might be expected and what actually occurs.
One might reasonably expect a country that frowned on selling sex in virtual form would also frown on selling it in actual form. Therefore it would be ironic that it doesn't.
Putting up an unprotected web site is akin to putting up a billboard. If I take a picture of the billboard and publish it in a textbook that kids read for the next 20 years, should I be expected to be sued by the billboard company?
It looks like a wider target though which will help a bit. I'm guessing that shoving it right up to the corner makes resizing windows from that corner more difficult than it should be for some people.
The tube is a significant piece of infrastructure. Estimates I've heard over the last few days said it carries about 3 million people a day.
As such there is still value in protecting it even if terrorists do move on to somewhere else.
Not to say that these scanners are necessarily a good idea or a reasonable way of spending the money. But just because there will be other targets for terrorists doesn't mean it isn't a good idea to try and protect key assets of your society.
But you still have Debian (the group of people) being allowed to do something other people aren't allowed to.
What is the difference between:
SPI (the trademark holder) allowing Debian (the affiliation of people) to alter Debian (the software) and still use the original mark while
not giving everyone else that right.
Mozilla (the trademark holder) allowing Debian (the affiliation of people) to alter Firefox (the software) and still use the original mark while not giving everyone else that right.
To be logically consistant Debian (the group of people) should not be able to distribute the Debian software with the Debian trademark. Debian has been granted management of that trademark by SPI and does not give the same rights to those they distribute to.
If the DSFG stop Debian (the group) using the Firefox trademark because they have been granted special rights to it then it must also stop them using the Debian one.
The tax office already knows all the interest you earned in your bank accounts, share dividends, salary etc. They could prefil all that and save people the effort of trawling through paperwork unless they felt something was wrong.
The license may restrict source-code from being distributed in modified form _only_ if the license allows the distribution of "patch files" with the source code for the purpose of modifying the program at build time. The license must explicitly permit distribution of software built from modified source code. The license may require derived works to carry a different name or version number from the original software. (This is a compromise. The Debian group encourages all authors not to restrict any files, source or binary, from being modified.)
Emphasis mine. It seems to me that the "issue" here has already been pretty much covered. The intent seems clear. Although it's not considered ideal Debian seems to have accepted that authors may want derived works to carry different identifiers of one sort or another.
Maybe it's just a pity it doesn't say:
The license may require derived works to carry different name, version numbers and/or trademarks from the original software.
The justice system is supposed to be innocent until proven guilty, and using the cache is one of the flimsiest proofs of intent to view or possess child pornography you can get.
Proven beyond reasonable doubt.
I do not believe that the contents of a cache is inherantly flimsy. It could quite feasibly demonstrate a pattern of usage. If it doesn't then it is the job of the defense lawyer to show to a jury how the evidence is flimsy. Show how the possession is unintentional and accidental. I don't think it warrants throwing it out entirely.
Your analogy is right though. If I were found with a bag of child pornography I could quite probably expect to go to jail if there were no alternate reasons for me having it that seemed within the realm of reasonableness.
The one thing I hate more than paying tax is working out my tax.
Last year I filled in my tax and missed out a bit of interest I had earned. It wasn't anything significant and the tax office sent me a nice letter saying that I'd missed out on a bit but that it wasn't a big problem etc etc.
But that left me thinking that if they already know how much interest I've earned (as it's all reported by the banks) then why the hell make me work it out myself. Just give me something filled in as much as possible and then let me check it for errors, fill in any gaps, and be done.
If there was reasonable doubt as to how it turned up in the cache then that would be a reasonable defence. If however there was other information in the cache (ie webpages showing the images in a visable way) or some other evidence suggesting intention then I say tough luck.
A 'real world' analogy might be obtaining hardcopy child porn and then claiming you don't have possession because you've put it in your recycling pile with your other papers and don't intend to look at it again. Tough luck, you clearly possessed it at one point and haven't stopped posessing it until you make sure you get rid of it.
There's no reason why it shouldn't be at least taken into consideration. At some point, the business has shelled out that money up front and their goal should be to get it back + a bit more because of the time value of money.
The effects of GST should be considered but I don't think the conclusion you reach, that profit margin should be calculated on it, is necessary (and may be illegal under Australian consumer protection law).
Your mentioning of the time value of money is correct but neglects the other side of the coin. As well as paying out GST when I buy something and not getting the "credit" until the end of the quarter I am also collecting GST and not paying out until the end of the quarter. So while I have "lost" some GST money I am also getting some and (assuming I'm doing a reasonable job) that amount should be more.
There is a "time value" consideration in there but it isn't as simple as that of a the straight cost of the good because the GST has an effect at both ends.
In your example, you're assuming a 36% profit. If you set your profits based upon the cost of your inputs, the sales price that your looking at without the tax on the inputs is around $136 + 10% = $149.60. Your $165 total would represent a 21% tax rate instead of a simple 10% rate.
I think you are confusing yourself or at least speaking too loosely. The tax rate is clearly a "simple" 10% because $15 is 10% of the non tax amount ($150). The tax man is only getting 10% so that is the tax rate.
The price could potentially increase by 21% if someone includes the GST they've paid when creating their margin. That doesn't make the 21% figure a tax rate, it indicates that someone somewhere is making additional profit through counting something as a cost that isn't really (as although you have paid GST out you still have it as a credit). The business' profit margin has really increased if they do not compensate for the GST components.
Slashdot Mirror
Someone criticising the use of "Dapper Drake" writes for a website called, er, "Mad Penguin".
It seems a tad stupid to be going on about horrible branding and how "developers make horrible marketing people" when discussing the phenomenon that Ubuntu has been in the linux distro "market".
To me the whimsical code names just seem another indication it really is "Linux for Human beings". It's personable and if there's a need for a more 'corporate' then a simple 5.04 or whatever is right there.
Sensible:
A truck "beeping" annoyingly when it reverses to alert people nearby that they might be in danger of being run over and horribly maimed or killed.
Stupid:
A phone "beeping" annoyingly to alert people nearby that they might be in danger of "losing" some "intellectual property".
If the 360 "flops" at launch then a lot of that may be because people have high(er) expectations of the PS3 and are prepared to wait and see before spending their hard earned cash.
Possibly the worst thing they could do in that situation is to launch a PS3 that doesn't meet those expectations. If you do that then the main reason people haven't been buying the 360 suddenly disappears. As long as people do appear willing to wait it would make sense to use that time to ensure your product is better placed than the competitors when buyers finally get to make their choice.
It's a balance of whether you will lose more customers who get tired of hanging on or will lose more through releasing a product that isn't clearly more attractive than the alternative.
They've just pulled the first gap filler out without a problem and are lining up on the second one.
I've been watching it for an hour or so and it's amazing watching them go calmly about their work with the earth in the background.
One might reasonably expect a country that frowned on selling sex in virtual form would also frown on selling it in actual form. Therefore it would be ironic that it doesn't.
welcome our new robot, er, underlords.
It looks like a wider target though which will help a bit. I'm guessing that shoving it right up to the corner makes resizing windows from that corner more difficult than it should be for some people.
The tube is a significant piece of infrastructure. Estimates I've heard over the last few days said it carries about 3 million people a day. As such there is still value in protecting it even if terrorists do move on to somewhere else.
Not to say that these scanners are necessarily a good idea or a reasonable way of spending the money. But just because there will be other targets for terrorists doesn't mean it isn't a good idea to try and protect key assets of your society.
I have a Powerlite sitting on the floor at home doing nothing. It's a heavy bugger!
But you still have Debian (the group of people) being allowed to do something other people aren't allowed to.
What is the difference between:
SPI (the trademark holder) allowing Debian (the affiliation of people) to alter Debian (the software) and still use the original mark while not giving everyone else that right.
Mozilla (the trademark holder) allowing Debian (the affiliation of people) to alter Firefox (the software) and still use the original mark while not giving everyone else that right.
To be logically consistant Debian (the group of people) should not be able to distribute the Debian software with the Debian trademark. Debian has been granted management of that trademark by SPI and does not give the same rights to those they distribute to.
If the DSFG stop Debian (the group) using the Firefox trademark because they have been granted special rights to it then it must also stop them using the Debian one.
It does not pre-fill them though.
The tax office already knows all the interest you earned in your bank accounts, share dividends, salary etc. They could prefil all that and save people the effort of trawling through paperwork unless they felt something was wrong.
Which packages are ones which employed or employ licences which "require derived works to carry a different name"?
Did Debian rename them? Perhaps if there's some historical cases of this happening I can relate to the problem might be clearer?
Maybe it's just a pity it doesn't say:
The license may require derived works to carry different name, version numbers and/or trademarks from the original software.
As far as I can see the Firefox trademark policy isn't fundamentally different from Debian's own trademark policy.
If you are distributing what Debian distribute you can call it Debian. If you want to do something different, call it something else.
Isn't that essentially what the Firefox trademark policy says?
I do not believe that the contents of a cache is inherantly flimsy. It could quite feasibly demonstrate a pattern of usage. If it doesn't then it is the job of the defense lawyer to show to a jury how the evidence is flimsy. Show how the possession is unintentional and accidental. I don't think it warrants throwing it out entirely.
Your analogy is right though. If I were found with a bag of child pornography I could quite probably expect to go to jail if there were no alternate reasons for me having it that seemed within the realm of reasonableness.
The one thing I hate more than paying tax is working out my tax.
Last year I filled in my tax and missed out a bit of interest I had earned. It wasn't anything significant and the tax office sent me a nice letter saying that I'd missed out on a bit but that it wasn't a big problem etc etc.
But that left me thinking that if they already know how much interest I've earned (as it's all reported by the banks) then why the hell make me work it out myself. Just give me something filled in as much as possible and then let me check it for errors, fill in any gaps, and be done.
If there was reasonable doubt as to how it turned up in the cache then that would be a reasonable defence. If however there was other information in the cache (ie webpages showing the images in a visable way) or some other evidence suggesting intention then I say tough luck.
A 'real world' analogy might be obtaining hardcopy child porn and then claiming you don't have possession because you've put it in your recycling pile with your other papers and don't intend to look at it again. Tough luck, you clearly possessed it at one point and haven't stopped posessing it until you make sure you get rid of it.
The Monitor irritated the hell out of me! It was probably supposed to be annoying though, so the voice acting was probably good :)
Call that a fire?
This is a fire.
Your mentioning of the time value of money is correct but neglects the other side of the coin. As well as paying out GST when I buy something and not getting the "credit" until the end of the quarter I am also collecting GST and not paying out until the end of the quarter. So while I have "lost" some GST money I am also getting some and (assuming I'm doing a reasonable job) that amount should be more.
There is a "time value" consideration in there but it isn't as simple as that of a the straight cost of the good because the GST has an effect at both ends.
The price could potentially increase by 21% if someone includes the GST they've paid when creating their margin. That doesn't make the 21% figure a tax rate, it indicates that someone somewhere is making additional profit through counting something as a cost that isn't really (as although you have paid GST out you still have it as a credit). The business' profit margin has really increased if they do not compensate for the GST components.