I forget which book i was reading, probably "The Tao of Personal Leadership" which maintained that the proper way to accomplish any weighty task is to familiarize yourself with it. Dig in deep. Then do nothing. At a later time, reproach it and the task will go far more smoothly. Once I read that I realized that in the past several years of profesional development, I had done just that. I don't just sit down and code as if I were running a marathon. I think about it all, then I "mull it over". This mulling really involves little. Just a little directed consciousness and everything falls into place without deliverate thought. As the years slip under my belt, I do less and less directed thinking and the results are always better than the last.
Really, you are correct. Lets take a look back at marriage... Greek Civilization - ~1930(roughtly) - Women couldn't own property, unless it was inherited from a passing of their husband.
1930-Today: Women own property 1950: Birth control clears the way for women to control their reporducticve cycles, to socialize with men and to pursue careers. 1970-Today:
Equal Rights Amendment (ERA) proposed. Expires unratified in 1985. Jurisprudence changed though, to include women and men.
Women are born under the mentality of the ERA.
Today: we finally have women in professional careers, every bit as educated and trained as men.
In short there is no reason to marry, except if someone stays home to raise a family. That person disengages from their career, and career development. And, if the marriage is disolved that person is at a substantial loss in the work place. Not to mention having another person to care for. Here, the courts are biased against men. They prefer to give custody to the female, even though more often the male is a better provider. This creates unbalance. Women suffer due to the bias in the courts, the men get off relatively scott free in terms of lifestyle. I wonder in the coming 50 years if women will think it is such a great idea to have ambition and property. The answer of course is individualistic. But with 85% of marriages with people people between 20 and 30 ending in divorce, society has yet to catch up to the idea that with women able to have equal opportunity, marriage isn't what it used to be.
There is another aspect, and that the more educated a socienty is the less it reproduces. Reproduction is done recreationally, and many pairs choose to have only 1 since one can be better provided for than two (budget constraints). Some even elect to have none.
The other side is: If we look back at the founding of this country, we see common law marriages. People just moved in together, had a party with a preist to pronounce them as married and that was it. Similarly, divorce was another affair for the preist.
Low and behold, the government gets involved with marriage licenses. Originally they were used to keep white women from parrying balck men (read into that what you will) until eventually it was extended to everyone. Now the government gets to say who you can marry and when you can be divorced. (Incedentally, you create a legal fiction).
I now am involved in a [uncontested mutually agreed upon] divorce (with no kids or joint property (This is not California)). But the government says we can't be divorced yet. Who the fuck are they to tell us when the love is over? It is because of this divorce that I became aware of all of the above. From now on, if I do get married again (and it will enirely depend on children) the government won't be involved. Just a minister and family. No government douments. Maybe a prenup to govern if there is a "divorce" but it won't be up to some judge who has no idea of the relationship and it won't be according to the term of the state.
The patriot missle system, as I have read, already does this. It blows up NEAR the missle. But, in testing, when it failed to blow up on cue, it did collide with the other missle. Not bad for a system that was originally designed to shoot down planes...
Laser defense is the only real way to defend against a non-balistic missle. (Heat it up until it pops)
You are garenteed a constitutional right to due process. Nothing can happen to you for demanding it. The fact that you require the government to do _all_ of their job is not one to be ashamed of. "It is not the function of our Government to keep the citizen from falling into error; it is the function of the citizen to keep the Government from falling into error." - Robert H. Jackson Surpreme Court Justice.
The government, with less and less of the will of the people (and more so rich investors and coprorations) cannot be trusted. Cooperation is not required, the law has already given the government whatever powers it requires to do the job (all too often too many powers, IMHO). Much like the 5th amendment allows one to deny testimony, and the mere use of the 5th admendment cannot constiute an admission of guilt, your demanding due process should be expected, not your cooperation.
Example: the IRS. So many people give into their notice of deficientcies and levies, despite the IRS not obtaining the proper court order. You can cooperate, but any action until that court order is voluntary. Also, I recently read a disturbing ruling that you may actually give up to your rights to anything they acquire from you voluntarily. So, you better demand due process and double check everything!!!
He was recognized in Germany up intil a lab accident left him hanicapped and partially blind. At which time he went into soclusion. In the 80s he was pursuaded to become public again, and has increased in notariety ever since, up until his death in 2001.
All I know is that a thoery that accurately predicts things at a sub-atomic level as well as a comsic level warrents investigation.
I never called them unintelligent. I just said that they don't intelligently react to it. They obviously intelligently consider it, before objecting or allowing.:-)
Leeches have risen in popularity and are in widespread use throughout the U.K. today. Maggots are increasing as well. As long as the parasite is not infectious (i.e. sterile) there is nothing wrong with their use.
The "dissillusioned" lawyer is Mark H. McCormack.
AUTHOR BIOGRAPHY - MARK H. McCORMACK was the founder of International Management Group, a multi-million-dollar, worldwide corporation. This corporation is the consultant to fifty Fortune 500 companies, a major producer of television programming, and is credited as the single most important influence in turning sports into big business.
The Heim Unified Field Theory or here is astonishingly accurate theory. Derived from Eenstien's thoery of relativity he postulates 12 (6 major) dimensions. He also postulates gravitophotons. It has been very suceesful in:
determining mass of most fundamental particles to experimental accuracy (the others are damn close)
Explaining the problem of entropy and the big bang. (In his model matter forms after expansion begins, so the laws of thermodynamics are consistent)
explains the effects we currently attribute to "dark matter" without needing actual matter.
brings relativity and quantum mechanics into accord.
I highly suggest you read up on it if you like physics.
The Terrible Truth About Lawyers is a book I read recently. I was pubished in the 80s, but is still very accurate. What the book goes on to claim (and its written by a laywer turned buisnessman) is that Laywers are the only people trained to control information, not react to it in any intelligent way. This is most obvious throughthe rules of evidence and the whole "objection!" in the court room to prevent evidence from being entered into the record.
Every other profession int he world is about reatcing intelligently to the information at hand and not trying to control the situation.
Thanks for the pre-1970's perspective. As a GenX-er I find it enlightening. I cannot imagine the nation without the income tax, yet it seems it really did exist prior to 1945 (and for some 150 years too!) I often think about the days before the income tax - where everything you earned was your own. Unfortately, only my grandparents can remember but are far too patriotic to discuss the [il]legitimacy of the income tax. The people pre-16th amendment are even harder to find.
Still with $7B going out to protect against the bird flu, (an act which I think is useless) I wonder how much we actually need.
Recently, I looked at the income tax of 1864, in which the nature - a tax indisputably applicable only to federal people - and the wording is nearly identical as what we have today. I seriously doubt that you or most americans are liable for FICA, therefore we could do without the SSN.
There is a movement in this country. At first, I considered it fringe, but I have found substantial truths in the claims of the fringe group. The group is the "tax patriot" or "tax protestor" group. It depends on which side of the fence you are on.
Anyway one of the key "features" of the income tax is that it is only enforceable against those that have a TIN (taxpayer id. number - for foreigners in the US) or SSN (non-foriegners). So the question is then "who needs a SSN?". Well if you are a born in a state of the United States, you most certainly do NOT. This is demonstrated by you having to APPLY for a SSN. Once that is the case then the IRS can track you. Without an SSN, you can't fill out their documents, and they cannot identify you. (Mind you, this does not stop them from collecting levies and leins on accounts that do not have a SSN associated)
How did we get SSNs? Your parents most likely applied for one for you. Why did they do that? Because they (or their parents) were convinced by a famous duck named Donald they needed to pay taxes to support WWII. (It was supposed to be a temporary 2 year tax). Well in order to get a dependent deduction on their taxes the IRS requires the SSN of the dependents claimed. So that is why you have one. That and a lot of places ask for one, without any legal basis to do so.
You can get a bank account without a SSN. I believe Wachovia has done this, and I am sure there are otehr banks that will do it when pushed. However these accounts come with a limitation: there is no interest paid on the account. That would/could create a taxpayer income liability, which must be reported to the IRS via a 1099-INT. Some argue that even interest is nto taxable. I am not going to delve into that can of worms here, but you should be able to see now that SSNs for most people are indeed optional. (You are likely to not have one if your parents never claimed you on their taxes, which is unlikely).
WARNING: There is a lot of rhetoric in the "tax protestor" community. You must investigate what you year. A lot is true. a lot is not. Take everything with a grain of salt before you have verified its claims. The above is what I have found to be true. But don't take my word for it!;-)
I sell noise cancellation material and noise cancellation material accessories. See, a lot of the noise you hear is not primary-source noise, it is 2ndary, meaning that you hear mostly reverberations. The primary waves bounce around (becoming 2ndary) and interfere with new primary waves, creating exessive noise. My material is extremely effective at cancelling 2ndary noise and somewhat effective at cancelling primary noise. Even with primary noise uncancelled, cancelling the 2ndary noise has a profound effect on your perception of the primary noise.
The effective pitch range of the material is frommidrange to high frequency. Low frequency (bass) is not as blocked, but dending in the install, it can do a substantial job of deadening the bass.
I sell this material by the yard in 12' wide rolls. It comes in many colors and patterns and is availible in berber and shag textures
Not at all. That os version 3.00 aplha. The 1.00 and 2.00 lines were quite stable.
The playser suffered from a high price tag ($800 us) and amall market (2 years in tech land means a lot) The division was bought by rio/sonic blue and then sold to the same company that owns denon and marantz. They don't know what the hell to do with it.
Still, the core code lives on in every rio/sonic blue player today. The staff backports things to the car player on the side.
1) Designed Issues. These are just plain sloppy design. But is there a way to mitigate this? Yes, with more extenstive and proven frameworks. Still designer lack-of-talent can still doom and app. These can generally be easily fixed because they are at a high enough level.
2) The harder problems come from the toolkits. This could be due to GLIBC or other"low level" libraries(LLL). I define a LLL as any toolkit which requires and permits you to manage memory implementation directly on a byte-basis. (C, C++, ASM.) Where as the high level libraries (HLL) are object oriented like Java, Python, PHP and not allow someone to mange memory directly.
PROPOSAL: Ideally, we should be able to substitude out a library with one of a completely different internal operation (i.e. vector strings rather than byte arrays, python dictionaries (or C implementations thereof) instead of C structs) recompile and test. Only when it works under all possible libriaries do we know that the only issues that remain are design errors.
The added advantage to replacing the underlying toolkits is that when an application is distributed, you can ensure that not all instances will have the same vulerabilities. If you have 3 string classes, and each download sent is not the same as the previous, then you will have a exploit that will only pertain to a subset of the downloads sent out. The inherint advantage of this is that you the developer get to write and distribute your application code, in a very architecture free manner, while limiting the feasibility of explotations on your customer base.
The simplification that I am making is that you can assure the toolkits are 100% error free. It is easier to assess (audit) the error-freeness of a toolkit from which your application can be constructed than it is to audit both eh application and any trickiness in the interface between your app and the toolkit. Having a changable toolkit prevents one from purposefully or unintentionally expliting the toolkit in known and unknown ways. (I belive the as-yet-unknown ways are the most dangerous and harest to track down)
So I think we can address these issues, and that as software becomes less coupled from the underlying implementation we will see only design errors. And even then the toolkits/frameworks will prevent a good many from seeing the light of day.
Why pay taxes and licenses to generate revenue for the government to operate. Unless there is a fiscal crisis, there should be no new taxes or licenses levied on the people.
Governments are not corporations. They are not to thrive of the populace, they only exist to support the populace in whatever limited role the voters decide. I personally would not elect anyone who thinks the government should het "its fair share", or that a new popuilar practice is some untapped revenue stream.
I am sure this will be modded as flame or troll, but it is not.
Miguel, I have watched for several years this Mono project. At first I thought it was a bad idea. Now I know it is a bad idea. I don't understand why you continue to fragment the community as the Mono project does. I remember the blurb about MS barring Mono from some conference recently. I don't know why you continue to add momenteum to a platform that you cannot control. That only benefits one person - the same one who controls the platform.
In the mean time, I see businesses citing Mono if they decide to move to Linux. However my understanding is that if you attempt to run a MS.NET based GUI application on non-MS platforms the most likely result is a spectacular failure because MS still has lock on some critical classes.
While I realize there is good ideas in.NET (CLI) and Mono, I don't see how this justfies the effort. Mono is adding support to.NET momentum, it is fragmenting the development efforts of the community. It is adding yet another language into the fray (C#).
The good things are that it gives us a CLI, but we could already have done in the Java, Perl, Python, or Parrot VMs without strengthening MS.
Now do note that my support would be different had MS released _all_ of.NET - so that the assumptions of business managers are indeed correct. What I am hoping for now is that you correct me and say that all.NET applications will run under Mono without modification and exactly as wthy do under.NET. If this is not the case, nor is it the [achievable] goal, then Mono should be disbanded. Refocus on Parrot or something.
Simple question, anything but simple answer. There is no fundamental love, it is not like a laugh. Love is the most complicated human emotion. Ignoring the hormones involved (the chemical aspect which *is* shared) is love the same for everyone? No. Love is the only human emotion which is grown and cultivated by your past experiences. Your expectations are entirely set by previous relationships - both the ones that worked and the ones that didn't. When you are in love with someone, it has more to do with them mostly falling into your expectations of how they should act. You put in what you expect to, and get out what you expect to. If they don't match, then you'll move on until you find something that is ameable.
Shameless Plug: My company has a solution
on
Too Many Passwords
·
· Score: 1
I just started at a company (Secured Services), we make a SSO (single sign-on) product (Identiprise) that is Solaris/Linux/Win32 compatible. Not only that but we can require Certs or RSA tokens (the key fob things with the changing random numbers). Once authenticated we can protect all coorporate assets. (We can even secure command line FTP traffic)
Our system also has user self-service, so your helpdesk doesn't have to field password change requests.
Once you're signed on to windows, the Proxy add-on system can automatically log you into any website, It will learn and maintain your passwords. Most of our customers use it to secure their web apps which are given out to subscribers, but it can work the otehr way: secure access to the services your organization subscribe to.
It's a really cool system.
If you have a large organization, I'd love to hear from you. (Note that this is my first ever hawking of a product for whom I work on in all my years on/.) jhihn@secured-services.NOSPAM.com (Remove the 'NOSPAM.')
After the 3.x series, the license changed drastically. Of course you won't find this discussed much. The permitted uses of MySQL as GPL are significantly reduced. You can only use MySQL in conjuction with OSS. Previously, you could use MySQL in a non-GPL environment under several permissive conditions. The new license is so restrictive now that a special exception is made for PHP
* MySQL is free use for those who are 100% GPL. If your application is licensed under GPL or compatible OSI license approved by MySQL AB, you are free to ship any GPL software of MySQL AB with your application ('application' means any type of software application, system, tool or utility). You do not need a separate signed agreement with MySQL AB, because the GPL license is sufficient. We do, however, recommend you contact us as there usually are good opportunities for partnership and co-marketing.
* Under the Open Source License, you must release the complete source code for the application that is built on MySQL. You do not need to release the source code for components that are generally installed on the operating system on which your application runs, such as system header files or libraries.
* Free use for those who never copy, modify or distribute. As long as you never distribute the MySQL Software in any way, you are free to use it for powering your application, irrespective of whether your application is under GPL license or not.
* You are allowed to modify MySQL Software source code any way you like as long as the distributed derivative work is licensed under the GPL as well.
* You are allowed to copy MySQL binaries and source code, but when you do so, the copies will fall under the GPL license.
* Optional GPL License Exception for PHP. As a special exception, MySQL AB gives permission to distribute derivative works that are formed with GPL-licensed MySQL software and with software licensed under version 3.0 of the PHP license. You must obey the GNU General Public License in all respects for all of the code used other than code licensed under version 3.0 of the PHP license.
* FLOSS License Exception. We have created a license exception which enables Free/Libre and Open Source software ("FLOSS") to be able to include the GPL-licensed MySQL client libraries despite the fact that not all open source licenses are compatible with the GPL (this includes the PHP license version 3.0). Read more about the FLOSS License Exception.
Considering the new license and still lacking features, there is little reason to use MySQL. Postgres has "all that anda bag of potato chips."
I looked into it. But I think that it would CAUSE more accidents than it stopped. You see when the call gets disconnected, they will take their eyes off the road and put them on the phone. (Exactly what you DON'T want them to do!) Then they fiddle with the phone, maybe redial (again more distraction, not less). And as soon as you get out of range they will call back or be called back making yet another moment of distraction.
I think it is best to just let them be at 20-50% aware rather than make them dip down to 5% aware.
If everyone had a jammer though, it'd be a different story.
I have watched and laughed as Tivo has bent over and taken everything from the industry. I am both a ReplayTV and MythTV owner. I don't understand why or how Tivo does what they do. If I bought a box with functionality X,Y,Z, and later Y is ammended in a way that causes some controversy (in a way I do not like), then I think Tivo has broken a contract.
Throughout it all, my ReplayTV experience has gone un-touched, I still have commercial skipping and the like. The way Replay skirts the issue is that they change model numbers and can then change the feature set. My 4500 has commercial skip where the 5500 does not. How Tivo is legally able to change it on all models is beyond me.
Not all the keys on the keyboard worked after (or during an install). For what you pay, all the keys should work from the get-go! Linux does! ANd I'm talking basis keys - home, end, I think backspace/delet to some degree and the like.
Slashdot Mirror
I forget which book i was reading, probably "The Tao of Personal Leadership" which maintained that the proper way to accomplish any weighty task is to familiarize yourself with it. Dig in deep. Then do nothing. At a later time, reproach it and the task will go far more smoothly. Once I read that I realized that in the past several years of profesional development, I had done just that. I don't just sit down and code as if I were running a marathon. I think about it all, then I "mull it over". This mulling really involves little. Just a little directed consciousness and everything falls into place without deliverate thought. As the years slip under my belt, I do less and less directed thinking and the results are always better than the last.
This is the way of the Tao.
Greek Civilization - ~1930(roughtly) - Women couldn't own property, unless it was inherited from a passing of their husband.
1930-Today: Women own property
1950: Birth control clears the way for women to control their reporducticve cycles, to socialize with men and to pursue careers.
1970-Today:
Today: we finally have women in professional careers, every bit as educated and trained as men.
In short there is no reason to marry, except if someone stays home to raise a family. That person disengages from their career, and career development. And, if the marriage is disolved that person is at a substantial loss in the work place. Not to mention having another person to care for. Here, the courts are biased against men. They prefer to give custody to the female, even though more often the male is a better provider. This creates unbalance. Women suffer due to the bias in the courts, the men get off relatively scott free in terms of lifestyle. I wonder in the coming 50 years if women will think it is such a great idea to have ambition and property. The answer of course is individualistic. But with 85% of marriages with people people between 20 and 30 ending in divorce, society has yet to catch up to the idea that with women able to have equal opportunity, marriage isn't what it used to be.
There is another aspect, and that the more educated a socienty is the less it reproduces. Reproduction is done recreationally, and many pairs choose to have only 1 since one can be better provided for than two (budget constraints). Some even elect to have none.
The other side is:
If we look back at the founding of this country, we see common law marriages. People just moved in together, had a party with a preist to pronounce them as married and that was it. Similarly, divorce was another affair for the preist.
Low and behold, the government gets involved with marriage licenses. Originally they were used to keep white women from parrying balck men (read into that what you will) until eventually it was extended to everyone. Now the government gets to say who you can marry and when you can be divorced. (Incedentally, you create a legal fiction).
I now am involved in a [uncontested mutually agreed upon] divorce (with no kids or joint property (This is not California)). But the government says we can't be divorced yet. Who the fuck are they to tell us when the love is over? It is because of this divorce that I became aware of all of the above. From now on, if I do get married again (and it will enirely depend on children) the government won't be involved. Just a minister and family. No government douments. Maybe a prenup to govern if there is a "divorce" but it won't be up to some judge who has no idea of the relationship and it won't be according to the term of the state.
The patriot missle system, as I have read, already does this. It blows up NEAR the missle. But, in testing, when it failed to blow up on cue, it did collide with the other missle. Not bad for a system that was originally designed to shoot down planes...
Laser defense is the only real way to defend against a non-balistic missle. (Heat it up until it pops)
You are garenteed a constitutional right to due process. Nothing can happen to you for demanding it. The fact that you require the government to do _all_ of their job is not one to be ashamed of. "It is not the function of our Government to keep the citizen from falling into error; it is the function of the citizen to keep the Government from falling into error." - Robert H. Jackson Surpreme Court Justice.
The government, with less and less of the will of the people (and more so rich investors and coprorations) cannot be trusted. Cooperation is not required, the law has already given the government whatever powers it requires to do the job (all too often too many powers, IMHO). Much like the 5th amendment allows one to deny testimony, and the mere use of the 5th admendment cannot constiute an admission of guilt, your demanding due process should be expected, not your cooperation.
Example: the IRS. So many people give into their notice of deficientcies and levies, despite the IRS not obtaining the proper court order. You can cooperate, but any action until that court order is voluntary. Also, I recently read a disturbing ruling that you may actually give up to your rights to anything they acquire from you voluntarily. So, you better demand due process and double check everything!!!
He was recognized in Germany up intil a lab accident left him hanicapped and partially blind. At which time he went into soclusion. In the 80s he was pursuaded to become public again, and has increased in notariety ever since, up until his death in 2001.
All I know is that a thoery that accurately predicts things at a sub-atomic level as well as a comsic level warrents investigation.
I never called them unintelligent. I just said that they don't intelligently react to it. They obviously intelligently consider it, before objecting or allowing. :-)
Leeches have risen in popularity and are in widespread use throughout the U.K. today. Maggots are increasing as well. As long as the parasite is not infectious (i.e. sterile) there is nothing wrong with their use.
The "dissillusioned" lawyer is Mark H. McCormack.
AUTHOR BIOGRAPHY -
MARK H. McCORMACK was the founder of International Management Group, a multi-million-dollar, worldwide corporation. This corporation is the consultant to fifty Fortune 500 companies, a major producer of television programming, and is credited as the single most important influence in turning sports into big business.
I highly suggest you read up on it if you like physics.
The Terrible Truth About Lawyers is a book I read recently. I was pubished in the 80s, but is still very accurate. What the book goes on to claim (and its written by a laywer turned buisnessman) is that Laywers are the only people trained to control information, not react to it in any intelligent way. This is most obvious throughthe rules of evidence and the whole "objection!" in the court room to prevent evidence from being entered into the record.
Every other profession int he world is about reatcing intelligently to the information at hand and not trying to control the situation.
Thanks for the pre-1970's perspective. As a GenX-er I find it enlightening. I cannot imagine the nation without the income tax, yet it seems it really did exist prior to 1945 (and for some 150 years too!) I often think about the days before the income tax - where everything you earned was your own. Unfortately, only my grandparents can remember but are far too patriotic to discuss the [il]legitimacy of the income tax. The people pre-16th amendment are even harder to find.
Still with $7B going out to protect against the bird flu, (an act which I think is useless) I wonder how much we actually need.
Recently, I looked at the income tax of 1864, in which the nature - a tax indisputably applicable only to federal people - and the wording is nearly identical as what we have today. I seriously doubt that you or most americans are liable for FICA, therefore we could do without the SSN.
There is a movement in this country. At first, I considered it fringe, but I have found substantial truths in the claims of the fringe group. The group is the "tax patriot" or "tax protestor" group. It depends on which side of the fence you are on.
;-)
Anyway one of the key "features" of the income tax is that it is only enforceable against those that have a TIN (taxpayer id. number - for foreigners in the US) or SSN (non-foriegners). So the question is then "who needs a SSN?". Well if you are a born in a state of the United States, you most certainly do NOT. This is demonstrated by you having to APPLY for a SSN. Once that is the case then the IRS can track you. Without an SSN, you can't fill out their documents, and they cannot identify you. (Mind you, this does not stop them from collecting levies and leins on accounts that do not have a SSN associated)
How did we get SSNs? Your parents most likely applied for one for you. Why did they do that? Because they (or their parents) were convinced by a famous duck named Donald they needed to pay taxes to support WWII. (It was supposed to be a temporary 2 year tax). Well in order to get a dependent deduction on their taxes the IRS requires the SSN of the dependents claimed. So that is why you have one. That and a lot of places ask for one, without any legal basis to do so.
You can get a bank account without a SSN. I believe Wachovia has done this, and I am sure there are otehr banks that will do it when pushed. However these accounts come with a limitation: there is no interest paid on the account. That would/could create a taxpayer income liability, which must be reported to the IRS via a 1099-INT. Some argue that even interest is nto taxable. I am not going to delve into that can of worms here, but you should be able to see now that SSNs for most people are indeed optional. (You are likely to not have one if your parents never claimed you on their taxes, which is unlikely).
WARNING: There is a lot of rhetoric in the "tax protestor" community. You must investigate what you year. A lot is true. a lot is not. Take everything with a grain of salt before you have verified its claims. The above is what I have found to be true. But don't take my word for it!
I sell noise cancellation material and noise cancellation material accessories. See, a lot of the noise you hear is not primary-source noise, it is 2ndary, meaning that you hear mostly reverberations. The primary waves bounce around (becoming 2ndary) and interfere with new primary waves, creating exessive noise. My material is extremely effective at cancelling 2ndary noise and somewhat effective at cancelling primary noise. Even with primary noise uncancelled, cancelling the 2ndary noise has a profound effect on your perception of the primary noise.
The effective pitch range of the material is frommidrange to high frequency. Low frequency (bass) is not as blocked, but dending in the install, it can do a substantial job of deadening the bass.
I sell this material by the yard in 12' wide rolls. It comes in many colors and patterns and is availible in berber and shag textures
Not at all. That os version 3.00 aplha.
The 1.00 and 2.00 lines were quite stable.
The playser suffered from a high price tag ($800 us) and amall market (2 years in tech land means a lot) The division was bought by rio/sonic blue and then sold to the same company that owns denon and marantz. They don't know what the hell to do with it.
Still, the core code lives on in every rio/sonic blue player today. The staff backports things to the car player on the side.
And yeah, it runs linux.
There are 2 kinds of issues:
1) Designed Issues. These are just plain sloppy design. But is there a way to mitigate this? Yes, with more extenstive and proven frameworks. Still designer lack-of-talent can still doom and app. These can generally be easily fixed because they are at a high enough level.
2) The harder problems come from the toolkits. This could be due to GLIBC or other"low level" libraries(LLL). I define a LLL as any toolkit which requires and permits you to manage memory implementation directly on a byte-basis. (C, C++, ASM.) Where as the high level libraries (HLL) are object oriented like Java, Python, PHP and not allow someone to mange memory directly.
PROPOSAL:
Ideally, we should be able to substitude out a library with one of a completely different internal operation (i.e. vector strings rather than byte arrays, python dictionaries (or C implementations thereof) instead of C structs) recompile and test. Only when it works under all possible libriaries do we know that the only issues that remain are design errors.
The added advantage to replacing the underlying toolkits is that when an application is distributed, you can ensure that not all instances will have the same vulerabilities. If you have 3 string classes, and each download sent is not the same as the previous, then you will have a exploit that will only pertain to a subset of the downloads sent out. The inherint advantage of this is that you the developer get to write and distribute your application code, in a very architecture free manner, while limiting the feasibility of explotations on your customer base.
The simplification that I am making is that you can assure the toolkits are 100% error free. It is easier to assess (audit) the error-freeness of a toolkit from which your application can be constructed than it is to audit both eh application and any trickiness in the interface between your app and the toolkit. Having a changable toolkit prevents one from purposefully or unintentionally expliting the toolkit in known and unknown ways. (I belive the as-yet-unknown ways are the most dangerous and harest to track down)
So I think we can address these issues, and that as software becomes less coupled from the underlying implementation we will see only design errors. And even then the toolkits/frameworks will prevent a good many from seeing the light of day.
Why pay taxes and licenses to generate revenue for the government to operate. Unless there is a fiscal crisis, there should be no new taxes or licenses levied on the people.
Governments are not corporations. They are not to thrive of the populace, they only exist to support the populace in whatever limited role the voters decide. I personally would not elect anyone who thinks the government should het "its fair share", or that a new popuilar practice is some untapped revenue stream.
I am sure this will be modded as flame or troll, but it is not.
.NET based GUI application on non-MS platforms the most likely result is a spectacular failure because MS still has lock on some critical classes.
.NET (CLI) and Mono, I don't see how this justfies the effort. Mono is adding support to .NET momentum, it is fragmenting the development efforts of the community. It is adding yet another language into the fray (C#).
.NET - so that the assumptions of business managers are indeed correct. What I am hoping for now is that you correct me and say that all .NET applications will run under Mono without modification and exactly as wthy do under .NET. If this is not the case, nor is it the [achievable] goal, then Mono should be disbanded. Refocus on Parrot or something.
Miguel, I have watched for several years this Mono project. At first I thought it was a bad idea. Now I know it is a bad idea. I don't understand why you continue to fragment the community as the Mono project does. I remember the blurb about MS barring Mono from some conference recently. I don't know why you continue to add momenteum to a platform that you cannot control. That only benefits one person - the same one who controls the platform.
In the mean time, I see businesses citing Mono if they decide to move to Linux. However my understanding is that if you attempt to run a MS
While I realize there is good ideas in
The good things are that it gives us a CLI, but we could already have done in the Java, Perl, Python, or Parrot VMs without strengthening MS.
Now do note that my support would be different had MS released _all_ of
Simple question, anything but simple answer. There is no fundamental love, it is not like a laugh. Love is the most complicated human emotion. Ignoring the hormones involved (the chemical aspect which *is* shared) is love the same for everyone? No. Love is the only human emotion which is grown and cultivated by your past experiences. Your expectations are entirely set by previous relationships - both the ones that worked and the ones that didn't. When you are in love with someone, it has more to do with them mostly falling into your expectations of how they should act. You put in what you expect to, and get out what you expect to. If they don't match, then you'll move on until you find something that is ameable.
I really should preview!!!
That is Secured - Services.com.
I just started at a company (Secured Services), we make a SSO (single sign-on) product (Identiprise) that is Solaris/Linux/Win32 compatible. Not only that but we can require Certs or RSA tokens (the key fob things with the changing random numbers). Once authenticated we can protect all coorporate assets. (We can even secure command line FTP traffic)
/.)
Our system also has user self-service, so your helpdesk doesn't have to field password change requests.
Once you're signed on to windows, the Proxy add-on system can automatically log you into any website, It will learn and maintain your passwords. Most of our customers use it to secure their web apps which are given out to subscribers, but it can work the otehr way: secure access to the services your organization subscribe to.
It's a really cool system.
If you have a large organization, I'd love to hear from you. (Note that this is my first ever hawking of a product for whom I work on in all my years on
jhihn@secured-services.NOSPAM.com (Remove the 'NOSPAM.')
Specifically:
* MySQL is free use for those who are 100% GPL. If your application is licensed under GPL or compatible OSI license approved by MySQL AB, you are free to ship any GPL software of MySQL AB with your application ('application' means any type of software application, system, tool or utility). You do not need a separate signed agreement with MySQL AB, because the GPL license is sufficient. We do, however, recommend you contact us as there usually are good opportunities for partnership and co-marketing.
* Under the Open Source License, you must release the complete source code for the application that is built on MySQL. You do not need to release the source code for components that are generally installed on the operating system on which your application runs, such as system header files or libraries.
* Free use for those who never copy, modify or distribute. As long as you never distribute the MySQL Software in any way, you are free to use it for powering your application, irrespective of whether your application is under GPL license or not.
* You are allowed to modify MySQL Software source code any way you like as long as the distributed derivative work is licensed under the GPL as well.
* You are allowed to copy MySQL binaries and source code, but when you do so, the copies will fall under the GPL license.
* Optional GPL License Exception for PHP. As a special exception, MySQL AB gives permission to distribute derivative works that are formed with GPL-licensed MySQL software and with software licensed under version 3.0 of the PHP license. You must obey the GNU General Public License in all respects for all of the code used other than code licensed under version 3.0 of the PHP license.
* FLOSS License Exception. We have created a license exception which enables Free/Libre and Open Source software ("FLOSS") to be able to include the GPL-licensed MySQL client libraries despite the fact that not all open source licenses are compatible with the GPL (this includes the PHP license version 3.0). Read more about the FLOSS License Exception.
Considering the new license and still lacking features, there is little reason to use MySQL. Postgres has "all that anda bag of potato chips."
You have a choice - believe in Origen or die.
Hallowed are the Ori!
Is this somehow referring to a SG-1 X-box game?
Agreed. Let's not forget KevLinDev, a great intro to SVG.
"Animation" is built into the DOM, but can be further enhanced by Javascript.
I looked into it. But I think that it would CAUSE more accidents than it stopped. You see when the call gets disconnected, they will take their eyes off the road and put them on the phone. (Exactly what you DON'T want them to do!) Then they fiddle with the phone, maybe redial (again more distraction, not less). And as soon as you get out of range they will call back or be called back making yet another moment of distraction.
I think it is best to just let them be at 20-50% aware rather than make them dip down to 5% aware.
If everyone had a jammer though, it'd be a different story.
I have watched and laughed as Tivo has bent over and taken everything from the industry. I am both a ReplayTV and MythTV owner. I don't understand why or how Tivo does what they do. If I bought a box with functionality X,Y,Z, and later Y is ammended in a way that causes some controversy (in a way I do not like), then I think Tivo has broken a contract.
Throughout it all, my ReplayTV experience has gone un-touched, I still have commercial skipping and the like. The way Replay skirts the issue is that they change model numbers and can then change the feature set. My 4500 has commercial skip where the 5500 does not. How Tivo is legally able to change it on all models is beyond me.
That the majority places shown also have the highest STD rates on the country?
Not all the keys on the keyboard worked after (or during an install). For what you pay, all the keys should work from the get-go! Linux does! ANd I'm talking basis keys - home, end, I think backspace/delet to some degree and the like.