In conventional warfare, attributation is easy: They're wearing distinctive uniforms. Computer viruses and malware doesn't have an embedded flag in it to tell you which government sent it, and even if it did, it couldn't be trusted.
Just require all state-sponsored malware to be signed and verified by the a third party. I can see no reason why such a system would fail.
I like WYSIWYG editing, and while I'm sure my use case falls well within LaTeX's bounds, it's also not far enough in to Word's long tail that it stops being particularly good at it.
I've spent the past week composing a ~50 page report for a programming assignment. For this I have used
Tracked changes
Decent style formatting
An actually functional spelling/grammar check
Mathematical typesetting (It's no LaTeX, but it's enough)
Smart Art
Including other Office docs such as Excel tables and Visio diagrams in the one case smart art wasn't smart enough
Automatic contents/table of figures/index generation
IEEE Referencing
Cross-referencing
And that's just off the top of my head. All this wrapped up in UI that exposes functionality rather than hiding it behind layers of obscure menus, in a package that links nicely with my online storage allowing me to easily access it from the office suite on my phone, any other computer with Word 2010+, and an online editor for the ones that don't. Add to this that the default styles in place since 2007 mean you have to be trying really hard to make an ugly document, and you're on to a winner.
Given that this is the seventh such report I've had to do since September, I've easily saved myself 30+ hours in things that are either impossible or absurdly circutous to do in OOo. Multiply that by my hourly rate and I'm closing on a grand saved by choosing to pay for capable software. As for upgrading due to being "blackmailed" in place of additional features, the value added from improved Skydrive integration alone is making me seriously consider upgrading to the 2013 package. All that's holding me back is the subscription based model: I prefer to own things.
If I pay for it, they better be telling me something reasonably accurate
There should be clauses in your SLA defining what they have to tell you and when, as well as financial penalties for failing to deliver uptime and/or information. If you don't have an SLA then what are you doing paying for it?
The Romance languages prevalent in western Europe use a double negative to suggest extra negativity, rather than reverting to a positive as in the Germanic languages . As such, I it could be reinforcing the idea of a reduction.
The M4 corridor/Thames Valley took off because of its proximity to Heathrow, and as such is very good for UK bases of large multinationals, but doesn't have the start-up culture that makes SF. That's what the work in Shoreditch is about. I've taken a few trips down there for various events and they've certainly got all the ingredients to make something great, but I presume all the other (failed) attempts at replicating Silicon Valley have too. Personally I hope they pull it off, but I remain cautiously optimistic.
Revenue for the quarter, which ended on Sept. 30, 2011, was $17.4 billion, up 7% from last year's first-quarter revenue result. Net revenue was $5.7 billion, up 6% from the previous year's 1Q result. Microsoft met financial analyst's expectations on earnings per share, delivering $0.68 per share in the quarter.
As a software tester on the autistic spectrum I can say that there's a large amount of truth in what you're saying: it's not some free path to genius and acclaim, however the eye for detail and precision that autistics tend to present is incredibly useful in the field. I spend a lot of my time looking through large sets of data searching for patterns, order, and more importantly differences to the norm; the specific way my brain is wired helps me immensely.
Exactly, Xbox didn't turn a profit until 2009. It was never supposed to turn a profit until 2009. It's the same deal here. By investing now while market share is relatively cheap they can secure a good portion (15/30% depending on how you count is nothing to be sniffed at) and exploit it for years to come.
Regarding this and your replies to my sibling posts, you clearly have your concepts of fairness and pleasentness confused. To be fair is to play the game according to the rules, i.e. the green cards are distributed in a manner such that all candidates have an equal chance of attaining one, and only a predetermined number are being issued. Accepting just the first group would be unfair as not all candidates had an equal chance. Accepting both groups would be just as unfair as it breaches another rule of the game. You cannot do that and call it far for the same reason that either the Giants or the Ranngers had to win the last world series, they could not both win. To accept both groups would be unfair on all the entrants from other years who only got the one chance to win. To accept both groups would be unfair on whomever whatever council it was that decided the correct number of greencards to be issued represents as it would be a suboptimal number for that year. They all signed up to the game one way or another. To change the rules midflow and argue that it is fair to do so requires a severe disconnection from any rational definition of the term
Now don't get me wrong, there is no way that it was nice for any of those people to receive a rejection after thinking they had it. But unfair or unjust it was not.
Does thid mean we have a UK citizen confirmed as having commited acts of war against the United States and her allies?... If you need me I'll be out back digging my bomb shelter.
Presumably, they chose Amazon's network as they were cheaper than renting time on a botnet. I'm intruiged as to the ramifications on the distributed computing black market as it were, whether it will force their prices down in this age of cheap computing (especially as none of the resources used are theirs per say) or they'll raise them as a charge for the anonymity Amazon and Google would never provide.
Why not have broad laws that cover these things that allow for opt-in (not opt-out) so we can stop hearing about this nonsense. It's the function of the government to define the rules of the game... where's my government!
Slashdot Mirror
In conventional warfare, attributation is easy: They're wearing distinctive uniforms. Computer viruses and malware doesn't have an embedded flag in it to tell you which government sent it, and even if it did, it couldn't be trusted.
Just require all state-sponsored malware to be signed and verified by the a third party. I can see no reason why such a system would fail.
I like WYSIWYG editing, and while I'm sure my use case falls well within LaTeX's bounds, it's also not far enough in to Word's long tail that it stops being particularly good at it.
I've spent the past week composing a ~50 page report for a programming assignment. For this I have used
And that's just off the top of my head. All this wrapped up in UI that exposes functionality rather than hiding it behind layers of obscure menus, in a package that links nicely with my online storage allowing me to easily access it from the office suite on my phone, any other computer with Word 2010+, and an online editor for the ones that don't. Add to this that the default styles in place since 2007 mean you have to be trying really hard to make an ugly document, and you're on to a winner.
Given that this is the seventh such report I've had to do since September, I've easily saved myself 30+ hours in things that are either impossible or absurdly circutous to do in OOo. Multiply that by my hourly rate and I'm closing on a grand saved by choosing to pay for capable software. As for upgrading due to being "blackmailed" in place of additional features, the value added from improved Skydrive integration alone is making me seriously consider upgrading to the 2013 package. All that's holding me back is the subscription based model: I prefer to own things.
If I pay for it, they better be telling me something reasonably accurate
There should be clauses in your SLA defining what they have to tell you and when, as well as financial penalties for failing to deliver uptime and/or information. If you don't have an SLA then what are you doing paying for it?
The Romance languages prevalent in western Europe use a double negative to suggest extra negativity, rather than reverting to a positive as in the Germanic languages . As such, I it could be reinforcing the idea of a reduction.
Declare them too expensive to replace, and build entire corporations that rely on them?
The M4 corridor/Thames Valley took off because of its proximity to Heathrow, and as such is very good for UK bases of large multinationals, but doesn't have the start-up culture that makes SF. That's what the work in Shoreditch is about. I've taken a few trips down there for various events and they've certainly got all the ingredients to make something great, but I presume all the other (failed) attempts at replicating Silicon Valley have too. Personally I hope they pull it off, but I remain cautiously optimistic.
If I know my Captain Scarlet (and I do), this is the beginning of the end.
"Experiment" in this context refers to each of the six installations on the ring: ALICE, ATLAS, CMS LHCb, LHCf, and TOTEM. So that's 18 PB/y in total.
Really?
As a software tester on the autistic spectrum I can say that there's a large amount of truth in what you're saying: it's not some free path to genius and acclaim, however the eye for detail and precision that autistics tend to present is incredibly useful in the field. I spend a lot of my time looking through large sets of data searching for patterns, order, and more importantly differences to the norm; the specific way my brain is wired helps me immensely.
Exactly, Xbox didn't turn a profit until 2009. It was never supposed to turn a profit until 2009. It's the same deal here. By investing now while market share is relatively cheap they can secure a good portion (15/30% depending on how you count is nothing to be sniffed at) and exploit it for years to come.
The Battle of Hastings is mine, Epic. You can't have it.
Regarding this and your replies to my sibling posts, you clearly have your concepts of fairness and pleasentness confused. To be fair is to play the game according to the rules, i.e. the green cards are distributed in a manner such that all candidates have an equal chance of attaining one, and only a predetermined number are being issued. Accepting just the first group would be unfair as not all candidates had an equal chance. Accepting both groups would be just as unfair as it breaches another rule of the game. You cannot do that and call it far for the same reason that either the Giants or the Ranngers had to win the last world series, they could not both win. To accept both groups would be unfair on all the entrants from other years who only got the one chance to win. To accept both groups would be unfair on whomever whatever council it was that decided the correct number of greencards to be issued represents as it would be a suboptimal number for that year. They all signed up to the game one way or another. To change the rules midflow and argue that it is fair to do so requires a severe disconnection from any rational definition of the term
Now don't get me wrong, there is no way that it was nice for any of those people to receive a rejection after thinking they had it. But unfair or unjust it was not.
It's just like normal Twitter, but you say what your neighbours are doing.
Can we please use our positive karma to block these as well?
Does thid mean we have a UK citizen confirmed as having commited acts of war against the United States and her allies? ... If you need me I'll be out back digging my bomb shelter.
Their Twitter
It damn well better be the Tomb of Horrors.
...admitting guilt to something that, before the DMCA, wouldn't even be considered a crime...
There are indeed many things in life that were not illegal until they were.
Presumably, they chose Amazon's network as they were cheaper than renting time on a botnet. I'm intruiged as to the ramifications on the distributed computing black market as it were, whether it will force their prices down in this age of cheap computing (especially as none of the resources used are theirs per say) or they'll raise them as a charge for the anonymity Amazon and Google would never provide.
Why not have broad laws that cover these things that allow for opt-in (not opt-out) so we can stop hearing about this nonsense. It's the function of the government to define the rules of the game... where's my government!
Like the data protection act? (A somewhat more understandable version).It's not quite what you're talking about, but it's close.