Very good question. But I would say no.
You did not get to read it, negotiate
any terms, or even put your signature to it.
But you did make 50 cents, and saved the
cost of postage.
No it's not. These are separate transactions.
The Adobe sale is done and complete.
Later sales by Softman are completely
separate transactions. Whether Softman
can make a profit or not is the risk Softman
takes. If they made a profit, maybe that
is because the marketroids at Adobe are
stupid.
Won't work. I'll just hack the PVR to
grab the codes and auto-feed them
to the unlocking decoder logic.
You could get more complicated than that,
(ex: some human logic based thingy not
easily automated), but then the users will
get pissed off via 'I couldn't watch the
end of the show, I had to go to the restroom,
and I missed the Pepsi ad with the secret code'.
Yep. The entertainment moguls are like dodos
being beaten and killed by clubs, except in
this case, the club is new technology.
Like the dodos, they will eventually become extinct.
I think you missed the point.
This is to have your own search engine
for your intranet, that is not
publicly viewable over the Internet.
Google's public search engine can't
see the documents in question.
Many organizations have huge intranets
with millions of documents.
While Tiny is good, it can be totally bypassed.
Search for 'yalta' and 'tooleaky'.
Tooleaky is a simple piggyback on IE that
can send information out, and if you use IE
as your browser, then you have configured Tiny
to allow outbound for IE, which means Tiny
cannot stop it unless you block for specific
IP addresses.
Yalta is ever better, in that it goes underneath
Tiny in the TCP/IP stack, and Tiny cannot see
the traffic. Microsoft can do the same trick.
The only safe way is with a separate non-M$
firewall that blocks traffic to all m$ IP addys.
Of course just m$ IPs may not be enough.
I was not attempting to 'interpret' the
article, just pointing out that the
'apparent observations' could have
alternative interpretations.
Want another? How about, lets speculate
wildly here, that the arrow of time in
that region has somehow reversed from
'normal' (our centric view) and that
the processes the galaxy is apparently
undergoing are actually happening in reverse!
The point is, my 'objections' are not
really objections, just 'alternative interpretations'.
It does not matter whose interpretation
is correct or not, we can never be sure anyway.
I read the article carefully. My point was
that it appears to be strange.
If one galaxy is rotating clockwise (from
our perspective), and another (either in
front or behind but lined up with the first)
is rotating counter-clockwise (from our
perspective), and at the large distance
involved, and the lack of accuracy in
measuring such distances, there actually
may be nothing strange going on at all.
The spiral arms that appear to
moving in the unexpected direction may
actually belong to the other galaxy
than the one that was apparently
observed. The article infers that
the two galaxies have collided, but they
actually could just be close enough
to each other to give the observed results.
111,000,000 lightyears is a long way away.
I'll not go into gravitational lensing
which can throw any galactic observation
into doubt.
Say hello once. If you hear nothing, hang up.
Do not say hello a second time.
If it was a real person that really needed to
talk to you, they will call back.
If it was a an autodialer, it will not likely
call you back. When you say hello more than
once, it's like responding to a spam that says
'click here to remove'. You know how that doesn't work.
I can also judge Heisenberg to be competent,
loyal to mankind (quite aware of how evil Hitler
was), and actually quite aware of the power in his hands and the potential dangers.
Not MSFT. You are a fool if you believe this.NUT technology will change things for the
better.
Hell, MSFT cannot fix .NET security exploits
in 6 months on their own servers!
This is just another security nightmare
waiting to happen.
Slashdot Mirror
You're right, it's more like a drug-bust on a trillion dollar scale.
BTW, if you haven't heard, Enron has not been convicted of anything yet.
They are wasting their time. Before doing the compression, you just filter out the ranges that you cannot hear anyway, and *then* compress it.
Very good question. But I would say no. You did not get to read it, negotiate any terms, or even put your signature to it. But you did make 50 cents, and saved the cost of postage.
It figures it would be in the 9th circus.
That way, if I don't want the software, at least I'll have a CD-RW that I can find a use for.
No it's not. These are separate transactions. The Adobe sale is done and complete. Later sales by Softman are completely separate transactions. Whether Softman can make a profit or not is the risk Softman takes. If they made a profit, maybe that is because the marketroids at Adobe are stupid.
Won't work. I'll just hack the PVR to grab the codes and auto-feed them to the unlocking decoder logic. You could get more complicated than that, (ex: some human logic based thingy not easily automated), but then the users will get pissed off via 'I couldn't watch the end of the show, I had to go to the restroom, and I missed the Pepsi ad with the secret code'.
Yep. The entertainment moguls are like dodos being beaten and killed by clubs, except in this case, the club is new technology. Like the dodos, they will eventually become extinct.
I think you missed the point.
This is to have your own search engine for your intranet, that is not publicly viewable over the Internet. Google's public search engine can't see the documents in question. Many organizations have huge intranets with millions of documents.
Tooleaky is a simple piggyback on IE that can send information out, and if you use IE as your browser, then you have configured Tiny to allow outbound for IE, which means Tiny cannot stop it unless you block for specific IP addresses.
Yalta is ever better, in that it goes underneath Tiny in the TCP/IP stack, and Tiny cannot see the traffic. Microsoft can do the same trick.
The only safe way is with a separate non-M$ firewall that blocks traffic to all m$ IP addys. Of course just m$ IPs may not be enough.
I was not attempting to 'interpret' the article, just pointing out that the 'apparent observations' could have alternative interpretations.
Want another? How about, lets speculate wildly here, that the arrow of time in that region has somehow reversed from 'normal' (our centric view) and that the processes the galaxy is apparently undergoing are actually happening in reverse!
The point is, my 'objections' are not really objections, just 'alternative interpretations'.
It does not matter whose interpretation is correct or not, we can never be sure anyway.
It is a cool picture though!
I read the article carefully. My point was that it appears to be strange. If one galaxy is rotating clockwise (from our perspective), and another (either in front or behind but lined up with the first) is rotating counter-clockwise (from our perspective), and at the large distance involved, and the lack of accuracy in measuring such distances, there actually may be nothing strange going on at all. The spiral arms that appear to moving in the unexpected direction may actually belong to the other galaxy than the one that was apparently observed. The article infers that the two galaxies have collided, but they actually could just be close enough to each other to give the observed results. 111,000,000 lightyears is a long way away. I'll not go into gravitational lensing which can throw any galactic observation into doubt.
Paper - Human and Machine readable.
Magcard - Only Machine readable.
It could be two galaxies that happen to be lined up from our point of view.
Space can be tricky, there is more there than meets the eye.
Anyway, bandwidth is not a true commodity in the sense that you can easily find another supplier within minutes.
Say hello once. If you hear nothing, hang up. Do not say hello a second time.
If it was a real person that really needed to talk to you, they will call back.
If it was a an autodialer, it will not likely call you back.
When you say hello more than once, it's like responding to a spam that says
'click here to remove'. You know how that doesn't work.
News.com rings a bell. May be off here, but it was definitely a news related site, framing all of the other news sites content.
I can also judge Heisenberg to be competent, loyal to mankind (quite aware of how evil Hitler was), and actually quite aware of the power in his hands and the potential dangers.
Are you sure?
Look at you, you're still alive you old fart!
Why was/is this parent moderated 'funny'?
Get a clue moderators.
Funny. Obviously, *you* did not observe this.
(mod parent up if you get it!)
Due to the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle?
Not MSFT. You are a fool if you believe this .NUT technology will change things for the
better. .NET security exploits
in 6 months on their own servers!
Hell, MSFT cannot fix
This is just another security nightmare waiting to happen.
True. But they must be truly random.
What are you proposing that be counted?
Bytes per page? Maybe.
A hash of each page? Maybe better.
That has to be your ISP doing that. They must be mucking with their DNS server.
Try http://216.239.37.101/ instead.