There's a donation page to aid the legal battle. My guess is that checking in is pointless. The authorities can simply get a warrant to see which cell phone subscribers are using the nearby towers if they need to know who is there.
They're mutually exclusive, except for your cell phone provider. I believe it's simply the fact that use of a cell phone (if you answer the phone) can cost you money, thus telemarketers may not call them. The exception, as noted, is your cell provider, who can reimburse you any used minutes.
I've had the same phone number for three years, and have never received a telemarketing call (not even through my provider). All services (banks, etc.) I use call my cell phone, which is fine.
Suppose the two sides of the code are exactly the same (except for comments/whitespace). There isn't any proof of its origin. If I can be unscrupulous, copy a piece of code, and change the comments and copyright notices, I'm sure more experienced people can too. (No, I've never done so...)
Small blocks of code simply aren't very interesting; lots of programmers use similar variable naming conventions and coding styles; and many people "reinvent the wheel" when writing small utility functions (atoi(), strstr(), etc. anyone?).
AT&T, Novell, et. al. might have to come to SCO's rescue for any real proof, and I'm sure they want to get involved. Really.
From http://www.microsoft.com/presspass/trial/nov01/11- 02settlement.asp:
1. developing, distributing, promoting, using, selling, or licensing any software that competes with Microsoft Platform Software or any product or service that distributes or promotes any Non-Microsoft Middleware;
2. shipping a Personal Computer that (a) includes both a Windows Operating System Product and a non-Microsoft Operating System, or (b) will boot with more than one Operating System; or
3. exercising any of the options or alternatives provided for under this Final Judgment.
So, does this mean M$ CAN restrict OEMs they still have "deals" with from shipping a computer with NO M$ operating system at all, or did I read this incorrectly? Can the OEMs re-negotiate their deals, in light of these findings without penalty from M$?
Well, at least I suppose it's a step in the right direction...
Offerings such as this (coupled with home schooling) can lead to greater and closer family bonds. Family members can support one-another during school and after school hours. There may be less pressure with this model and it could be safer for children. It could bring the traditional so-called "quality" of a private school into the comfort of one's own home.
Public schools, on the other hand, offer children a chance to enter a cultural melting pot (at least, my high school was) not available via the home-schooling model. Children interact with more people in a public school and can build strong social skills from the experience.
Sadly, this model may not be available to everyone. It has requirements ($2000/yr, a computer, and internet connectivity) not available to all families.
I suppose it's just like most things *shrug*. It has ups and downs.
The United States Postal Service was constitutionally provided for (Article I, Section 8).
Because of its nature, the cost you pay when mailing something, is, in fact, a form of tax. (You are paying a governmental entity for a service.) The nice thing is that a portion of the tax is optional - you only pay for what you send (the other portion comes from income tax, methinks).
While it is, by definition, a monopoly, it is no more a monopoly then its bretheren, such as the Armed Forces or the US Mint, for which we pay taxes as well.
We will pay taxes for an electronic mail system set up by the government, whether we use it or not (yes, that can be considered bad).
However, it could provide a means by which people without computers (yes, they exist) could send and receive electronic mail. Until we know the details of the service, let us keep an open mind. It could be something as wonderful (or not).
Just a thought - you could deploy something that is, in-fact, mission critical on Linux/ix86 - and it wouldn't even cost an arm and a leg. (Just a leg, perhaps.)
Slashdot Mirror
There's a donation page to aid the legal battle. My guess is that checking in is pointless. The authorities can simply get a warrant to see which cell phone subscribers are using the nearby towers if they need to know who is there.
https://fundrazr.com/d19fAf?ref=sh_25rPQa
... after all that free money, none of the scammer-spammers have bought a computer newer than an Apple II...
Semi-OT
They're mutually exclusive, except for your cell phone provider. I believe it's simply the fact that use of a cell phone (if you answer the phone) can cost you money, thus telemarketers may not call them. The exception, as noted, is your cell provider, who can reimburse you any used minutes.
I've had the same phone number for three years, and have never received a telemarketing call (not even through my provider). All services (banks, etc.) I use call my cell phone, which is fine.
Suppose the two sides of the code are exactly the same (except for comments/whitespace). There isn't any proof of its origin. If I can be unscrupulous, copy a piece of code, and change the comments and copyright notices, I'm sure more experienced people can too. (No, I've never done so...)
Small blocks of code simply aren't very interesting; lots of programmers use similar variable naming conventions and coding styles; and many people "reinvent the wheel" when writing small utility functions (atoi(), strstr(), etc. anyone?).
AT&T, Novell, et. al. might have to come to SCO's rescue for any real proof, and I'm sure they want to get involved. Really.
This seems, in some ways, similar to:
http://www.texasrepublic.org
From http://www.microsoft.com/presspass/trial/nov01/11- 02settlement.asp:
1. developing, distributing, promoting, using, selling, or licensing any software that competes with Microsoft Platform Software or any product or service that distributes or promotes any Non-Microsoft Middleware;
2. shipping a Personal Computer that (a) includes both a Windows Operating System Product and a non-Microsoft Operating System, or (b) will boot with more than one Operating System; or
3. exercising any of the options or alternatives provided for under this Final Judgment.
So, does this mean M$ CAN restrict OEMs they still have "deals" with from shipping a computer with NO M$ operating system at all, or did I read this incorrectly? Can the OEMs re-negotiate their deals, in light of these findings without penalty from M$?
Well, at least I suppose it's a step in the right direction...
:( Pyre
I believe it was released to the general public prior to the patent file date. If it wasn't, qtest1a certainly was, in all of its 3-level glory
Either we have (a) prior art or (b) Quake isn't in the scope of the patent, I should think.
Then again, that's what I get for thinking.
Offerings such as this (coupled with home schooling) can lead to greater and closer family bonds. Family members can support one-another during school and after school hours. There may be less pressure with this model and it could be safer for children. It could bring the traditional so-called "quality" of a private school into the comfort of one's own home.
Public schools, on the other hand, offer children a chance to enter a cultural melting pot (at least, my high school was) not available via the home-schooling model. Children interact with more people in a public school and can build strong social skills from the experience.
Sadly, this model may not be available to everyone. It has requirements ($2000/yr, a computer, and internet connectivity) not available to all families.
I suppose it's just like most things *shrug*. It has ups and downs.
-- Pyre
The United States Postal Service was constitutionally provided for (Article I, Section 8).
Because of its nature, the cost you pay when mailing something, is, in fact, a form of tax. (You are paying a governmental entity for a service.) The nice thing is that a portion of the tax is optional - you only pay for what you send (the other portion comes from income tax, methinks).
While it is, by definition, a monopoly, it is no more a monopoly then its bretheren, such as the Armed Forces or the US Mint, for which we pay taxes as well.
We will pay taxes for an electronic mail system set up by the government, whether we use it or not (yes, that can be considered bad).
However, it could provide a means by which people without computers (yes, they exist) could send and receive electronic mail. Until we know the details of the service, let us keep an open mind. It could be something as wonderful (or not).
-- Pyre
Just a thought - you could deploy something that is, in-fact, mission critical on Linux/ix86 - and it wouldn't even cost an arm and a leg. (Just a leg, perhaps.)
See:
Mission Critical Linux
Oracle