He didn't say anything about variety. He was talking about "better."
Judging by the apparant popularity of usage, the pale imitations of Windows are the best of the Linux desktops -- kind of sad, I know, but what do you want in a system that was designed to be Command-Line?
I always prefer the original language with subtitles.... The dubbing always seems to take something away.
I prefer subtitles when the dub is so bad that it loses something. Or, to be precise, I prefer dubs when they're good enough that they lose less that is lost by being forced to read the script instead of watching the show and hearing it.
Anyone who thinks "paganism" is recent is merely showing their lack of knowledge in ancient religions
Or merely an apt understanding of language.
There were no contemporaries to early Christians or Jews who called themselves "Pagans." There were Romans, Celts, Druids, Egyptians, and a slew of others, but no "pagans."
"Paganism" is a modern religion, which draws most of its tennets from inference and extrapolation from the historical record.
Its like a tenant saying to a landlord - "there is a technical mistake which makes the tenancy agreement void - so I can now live in your house rent-free forever.."
Let's say that you're a hot chick, and you sign a 100-year lease for a great apartment for $100 and sex with the landlord.
You parents/boyfriend/friendly pro-bono fema-lawyer files suit, arguing that the "have sex" part is illegal.
So, you're now in court, and you can probably get the "must have sex" part tossed out easily enough. Now, however, the status of the rest of the lease is in the judge's hands--he might apply rent-control laws and say that the contract remains, even without the sex clause, or he might adjust it, or he might toss it out. All depends on the judge and the facts of the case.
Take a look at sections 7 and 8 of the GPL. A judge could, in my non-lawyerly opinion, interpret them as a modifiability clause, and alter the GPL instead of voiding it. (And remember, no one wants the GPL voided--they just want it invalidated.)
If the GPL *is* invalid, as SCO claim[s], thene the code reverts back to being the copyright of the indivdual contributers...
Only if the GPL is totally voided--which would make the re-compilation of Linux impracticable. (Annoying word, that--sure, it COULD be done, but it's not practical...)
If SCO wins their "Copyleft is non-constitutional" argument, then they'll probably argue that the GPL is a warranty-free release into the Public Domain, or at least similar to the BSD license.
Word, on the other hand, generates the worst HTML I have ever seen.
Yep. To ensure "round tripping" of documents, MS created proprietary tags to include all of the Office document information that isn't part of HTML (such as page breaks, section info, etc.)
If you're using office 2000, there is a downloadable tool that will generate "cleaner" HTML--and, AFAIK, both XP and 2003 have similar options.
Are there other, genuine examples of MS community sites? Or alternatively, attempts that are obviously MS driven? I'm just interested to compare the strength of the OSS community with the MS community (yes I know they are not logically exclusive, but in reality it seems to be pretty much the case).
Actually, a better way to measure carnal ability is "number of female orgasims / year."
Cock size is important insofar that it matches, and that it's used by a competent male. But a defficincy in cock-size can be made up for by effort; a lazy jerk with a big cock just won't have the same effect that a small-dick'd man who put his heart and soul for three hours a night into it could.
With (far) less than a hundred years until super-human intellectual capacities are available in pure computing substrates
The Singularity is not coming. We will not be surpassed. The future will not be perfect.
AI has been "fifty years away" for fifty years now. We'll have human-level AI shortly after we have profitable fusion reactors, and to get beyond that, we'll have to do quite a bit more than "trust in the computer."
And, of course, that's assuming that the same capitalism that came up with Clippy will even fund an AI.
The human mind consists of macro-scale sections, cellular-level interconnects, bio-chemical interactions (folk with organ transplants have had memories of their donors), likely a few quantum-level effects, and possibly a non-physical spiritual component to boot.
Give this complex structure, which reproduces at high yeilds with no specialized external equipment, we'll likely favor human-augmentation before we switch to wholly-artificial sentience. Whole body-replacement is a percievable future, (oods of capitalist reasons for that one) but the singularity isn't.
And that's without even getting into the space agency still using 8088s and Pentium 90s. (The faster a chip gets, the smaller its interconnects--and when you get to human-level, the whole darn thing will probably be at least as fragile as humanity.)
black and white are not shades of gray. a shade is light diminished in intensity.
"shade" is a commonly used word to describe a variation in a color, especially along the intensity. (Plus, you could always say that up through pure white grey has a negative dimishment of intensity, and at the theoretical extreme you'd wind up with white.)
Plus, it's a play off of "the world is not black and white, but a thousand shades of grey."
And, while we're amazingly off topic...
Are you suggesting coconuts migrate?
Actually, they do. I have seen coconuts here in Albany, which means that, as they don't grow here, they must migrate.
Ex: How many cars in the world are on the road right now? Well no one can really say to any degree of accuracy....but you definitely can't say its a scarcity.
Actually, it's theoretically possible (and in some places, quite pracitcal) to count all of the cars on the road at any given time. or, even better, the total ammonut of cars that pass a given roadway during a stretch of time.
Oh, come on, FK. You know as well as I do that there are innumerable reasons to allow something like this to be done: Training, morale, fostering intellectual curiosity, testing equipment, and probably a few more.
Like, oh, boosting PR for the site, to attract new personnel. (Note the "what else we do" link at the bottom of the page.)
Catstrophic failure is catastrophic failure. A Civil War soldier whose rifle cracks is exactly as out of luck as a Land Warrior whose system crashes.
(more, actually--the LW can concievably recover from a crashed system when he gets an hour or so, and the system will "know" that his suit's on the fritz. The civil war soldier needs to make do, steal a rifle, or wait for a replacement to be issued.)
No not public domain the work will still be Copyright.
Only if the ENTIRE license is tossed, which would make several persons's work undistributable.
The GPL is, in essence, three major parts: "You can distribute this for use for free." "You can make deritivive works and distribute them." "If you make derivitive works, you have to release them under the GPL."
SCO is arguing that the third part is invalid, and they'll argue that the first two are perfectly valid.
Licenses can and often are modified by a judge. If a judge were to decide as a matter of law that you and I have a contract, he could decide what the terms of that contract were--and if we had a contract that he saw as bad (like, oh, a contract employing me to clean your house for money and coital rights to your wife), he could strike only the bad parts (the coital rights to your wife) and leave the rest (clean house for money.)
Don't troll just because you don't understand anything about the law.
If only PART of the GPL is gone, then it could (and IMO very likely WOULD) still be construed as partially valid--if not as a license, then as an indicator of permission for Public Domain copying.
I hope that THIS claim can go to court, so the US legal arbiters can say "yes" or "no" to what is just about the only theoretically problem with the GPL.
The thought of Windows even being considered for such a mission critical application (i.e. keeping our boys alive)
Stop.
The US military has been putting up with gear that breaks, fails, overheats, jams, or is in chronically short supply since its inception way back during the Revolutionary War.
A fancy new radio will NOT keep our boys alive--it'll just let them be more efficient in killing the other country's boys.
What keeps our boys alive is the realization that everything they have may break and fall apart, and they'll have to find a way to win anyway.
If the GPL is invalid, then while SCO was redistributing Linux, the company was infringing copyright, because nothing other than the GPL gives SCO the privilege to do that.
Two points:
Any other consequences of the GPL being invalid are IBM's to argue; SCO certainly isn't going to include "this means we're guilty of massive copyright infringement" in a brief.
SCO is, in my non-lawyerly opinion, arguing that the STRONG copyleft sections of the GPL are unconstitutional, and that the GPL is therefore simply a disclaimer of warranty and a declaration that said so-realased software is public domain.
Remember: legal briefs are essentially a series of outrageous claims that are opposed or not opposed, and once the moderately-lengthy discovery process is done, there will be a trial about very severe differnces of opinion in fact and law.
IBM may have the most-feared legal team in the world, but SCO's millions can certainly pay for some competent counsel, even if the CEO's a moron.
While I don't use Outlook 2003 (and never will), from what I've read the person you replied to seemed to be correct. Would you care to elaborate on what you think is incorrect about his comments regarding Outlook 20003 DRM?
Office 2003 "IRM" (To use MS's term) requires Windows Server 2003, and it has to be enabled and turned-on for it to work at all.
If by "your e-mail" you mean "e-mail that you recieve at work", then, yes, MS enables your employer to decide what can and can't be done with it.
On the other hand, if by "your e-mail" you mean "e-mail that you send or is sent to your pesonal e-mail account", then, no, MS really isn't going to allow anyone to control what you do there, nor would they really want to.
Slashdot Mirror
No OS has more variety on the desktop than Linux.
He didn't say anything about variety. He was talking about "better."
Judging by the apparant popularity of usage, the pale imitations of Windows are the best of the Linux desktops -- kind of sad, I know, but what do you want in a system that was designed to be Command-Line?
I always prefer the original language with subtitles. ... The dubbing always seems to take something away.
I prefer subtitles when the dub is so bad that it loses something. Or, to be precise, I prefer dubs when they're good enough that they lose less that is lost by being forced to read the script instead of watching the show and hearing it.
Anyone who thinks "paganism" is recent is merely showing their lack of knowledge in ancient religions
Or merely an apt understanding of language.
There were no contemporaries to early Christians or Jews who called themselves "Pagans." There were Romans, Celts, Druids, Egyptians, and a slew of others, but no "pagans."
"Paganism" is a modern religion, which draws most of its tennets from inference and extrapolation from the historical record.
The BSD licence is a copyleft licence in the same way the the GPL is.
Last time I checked, BSD allowed for the creation of derivitive works and non-attributed sale of said works.
It's quite different from the GPL; if it wasn't, Windows wouldn't have its TCP/IP stack and OS X wouldn't even exist.
Its like a tenant saying to a landlord - "there is a technical mistake which makes the tenancy agreement void - so I can now live in your house rent-free forever.."
Let's say that you're a hot chick, and you sign a 100-year lease for a great apartment for $100 and sex with the landlord.
You parents/boyfriend/friendly pro-bono fema-lawyer files suit, arguing that the "have sex" part is illegal.
So, you're now in court, and you can probably get the "must have sex" part tossed out easily enough. Now, however, the status of the rest of the lease is in the judge's hands--he might apply rent-control laws and say that the contract remains, even without the sex clause, or he might adjust it, or he might toss it out. All depends on the judge and the facts of the case.
Take a look at sections 7 and 8 of the GPL. A judge could, in my non-lawyerly opinion, interpret them as a modifiability clause, and alter the GPL instead of voiding it. (And remember, no one wants the GPL voided--they just want it invalidated.)
If the GPL *is* invalid, as SCO claim[s], thene the code reverts back to being the copyright of the indivdual contributers...
Only if the GPL is totally voided--which would make the re-compilation of Linux impracticable. (Annoying word, that--sure, it COULD be done, but it's not practical...)
If SCO wins their "Copyleft is non-constitutional" argument, then they'll probably argue that the GPL is a warranty-free release into the Public Domain, or at least similar to the BSD license.
Tumbleweed and his quandry.
Does this mean I should repent for my sins, or do a lot of sinning while there's still time?
Repent. While Pascal's wager is out of popularity, Tumbleweed's quandary can easily be solved by a simple realization:
Do a lot of sinning now, and if the world doesn't end, we'll make your life extremely miserable.
Word, on the other hand, generates the worst HTML I have ever seen.
Yep. To ensure "round tripping" of documents, MS created proprietary tags to include all of the Office document information that isn't part of HTML (such as page breaks, section info, etc.)
If you're using office 2000, there is a downloadable tool that will generate "cleaner" HTML--and, AFAIK, both XP and 2003 have similar options.
The code that Frontpage produces is a mess, no matter how good the designer is using it.
No. FP can be set to make "non-messy" code.
Take a look at my website--specifically one of the second-level pages. http://www.castlesteelstone.us/opengaming.htm for example.
The HTML isn't the best in the world, but it's hardly a "mess"--and it was done in Frontpage.
IIRC, doctrines like estoppel apply to courts, not judges.
it's perfectly alight, for example, for a lawyer to argue "My client didn't fight your client, and even if he did, it was self-defense."
Are there other, genuine examples of MS community sites? Or alternatively, attempts that are obviously MS driven? I'm just interested to compare the strength of the OSS community with the MS community (yes I know they are not logically exclusive, but in reality it seems to be pretty much the case).
Yes. http://www.mvps.org/
It's a community-run site for assistance and aid in using Office. I've found it rather invaluable in figuring out Office.
Actually, a better way to measure carnal ability is "number of female orgasims / year."
Cock size is important insofar that it matches, and that it's used by a competent male. But a defficincy in cock-size can be made up for by effort; a lazy jerk with a big cock just won't have the same effect that a small-dick'd man who put his heart and soul for three hours a night into it could.
With (far) less than a hundred years until super-human intellectual capacities are available in pure computing substrates
The Singularity is not coming. We will not be surpassed. The future will not be perfect.
AI has been "fifty years away" for fifty years now. We'll have human-level AI shortly after we have profitable fusion reactors, and to get beyond that, we'll have to do quite a bit more than "trust in the computer."
And, of course, that's assuming that the same capitalism that came up with Clippy will even fund an AI.
The human mind consists of macro-scale sections, cellular-level interconnects, bio-chemical interactions (folk with organ transplants have had memories of their donors), likely a few quantum-level effects, and possibly a non-physical spiritual component to boot.
Give this complex structure, which reproduces at high yeilds with no specialized external equipment, we'll likely favor human-augmentation before we switch to wholly-artificial sentience. Whole body-replacement is a percievable future, (oods of capitalist reasons for that one) but the singularity isn't.
And that's without even getting into the space agency still using 8088s and Pentium 90s. (The faster a chip gets, the smaller its interconnects--and when you get to human-level, the whole darn thing will probably be at least as fragile as humanity.)
black and white are not shades of gray. a shade is light diminished in intensity.
"shade" is a commonly used word to describe a variation in a color, especially along the intensity. (Plus, you could always say that up through pure white grey has a negative dimishment of intensity, and at the theoretical extreme you'd wind up with white.)
Plus, it's a play off of "the world is not black and white, but a thousand shades of grey."
And, while we're amazingly off topic...
Are you suggesting coconuts migrate?
Actually, they do. I have seen coconuts here in Albany, which means that, as they don't grow here, they must migrate.
Ex: How many cars in the world are on the road right now? Well no one can really say to any degree of accuracy....but you definitely can't say its a scarcity.
Actually, it's theoretically possible (and in some places, quite pracitcal) to count all of the cars on the road at any given time. or, even better, the total ammonut of cars that pass a given roadway during a stretch of time.
but what about an abudance of happiness, or love?
Those are states, not measurable quantities.
I love my wife more than anything else. My friend Em loves his wife, AFAIK more than anything else. How do you tell which one of us has "more" love?
Then how do you explain the fact that he got modded UP? A site full of Linux zealots
/., not gnu.org. /. is filled with geeks of a myraid of persuasions--a substantial majority likely don't use Linux, or don't use it exclusively.
This is
Oh, come on, FK. You know as well as I do that there are innumerable reasons to allow something like this to be done: Training, morale, fostering intellectual curiosity, testing equipment, and probably a few more.
Like, oh, boosting PR for the site, to attract new personnel. (Note the "what else we do" link at the bottom of the page.)
Which is easy to do with simple equipment.
Catstrophic failure is catastrophic failure. A Civil War soldier whose rifle cracks is exactly as out of luck as a Land Warrior whose system crashes.
(more, actually--the LW can concievably recover from a crashed system when he gets an hour or so, and the system will "know" that his suit's on the fritz. The civil war soldier needs to make do, steal a rifle, or wait for a replacement to be issued.)
No not public domain the work will still be Copyright.
Only if the ENTIRE license is tossed, which would make several persons's work undistributable.
The GPL is, in essence, three major parts: "You can distribute this for use for free." "You can make deritivive works and distribute them." "If you make derivitive works, you have to release them under the GPL."
SCO is arguing that the third part is invalid, and they'll argue that the first two are perfectly valid.
Licenses can and often are modified by a judge. If a judge were to decide as a matter of law that you and I have a contract, he could decide what the terms of that contract were--and if we had a contract that he saw as bad (like, oh, a contract employing me to clean your house for money and coital rights to your wife), he could strike only the bad parts (the coital rights to your wife) and leave the rest (clean house for money.)
Ah, the good 'ol Chewbacca defense.
Don't troll just because you don't understand anything about the law.
If only PART of the GPL is gone, then it could (and IMO very likely WOULD) still be construed as partially valid--if not as a license, then as an indicator of permission for Public Domain copying.
I hope that THIS claim can go to court, so the US legal arbiters can say "yes" or "no" to what is just about the only theoretically problem with the GPL.
The thought of Windows even being considered for such a mission critical application (i.e. keeping our boys alive)
Stop.
The US military has been putting up with gear that breaks, fails, overheats, jams, or is in chronically short supply since its inception way back during the Revolutionary War.
A fancy new radio will NOT keep our boys alive--it'll just let them be more efficient in killing the other country's boys.
What keeps our boys alive is the realization that everything they have may break and fall apart, and they'll have to find a way to win anyway.
Two points:
Remember: legal briefs are essentially a series of outrageous claims that are opposed or not opposed, and once the moderately-lengthy discovery process is done, there will be a trial about very severe differnces of opinion in fact and law.
IBM may have the most-feared legal team in the world, but SCO's millions can certainly pay for some competent counsel, even if the CEO's a moron.
While I don't use Outlook 2003 (and never will), from what I've read the person you replied to seemed to be correct. Would you care to elaborate on what you think is incorrect about his comments regarding Outlook 20003 DRM?
Office 2003 "IRM" (To use MS's term) requires Windows Server 2003, and it has to be enabled and turned-on for it to work at all.
If by "your e-mail" you mean "e-mail that you recieve at work", then, yes, MS enables your employer to decide what can and can't be done with it.
On the other hand, if by "your e-mail" you mean "e-mail that you send or is sent to your pesonal e-mail account", then, no, MS really isn't going to allow anyone to control what you do there, nor would they really want to.