bucket loads of hardware into (pcs, printers, etc...) into peoples car.
Maybe SCO is a legitimate company after all. Sounds like a typical tech company to me, with employees focusing on hardware rather than feminine beauty.
You may modify your copy or copies of the Program *or any
portion of it*, thus forming a work based on the Program
The armchair lawyers to which you refer are reading the license as emphasized above. This implies that, yes, even that one simple function does constitute a basis for a "work based on the Program".
However, the judge and jury would most likely see the license as:
You may modify your copy or copies of the Program or any portion of it, thus forming a work *
based on the Program*
which implies rather that the new work would have to provide similar functionality, or that the portion of that work for which that code is used would have to provide similar funcionality when compared to the original Program from whence it came. That is, a math library used in a tax program, if it used similar code to some GNU library libmath.so, would fall under the category so long as the judge and jury understood the KISS concept of small programs and libraries working together, as in the UNIX philosophy, as opposed to complex, (mostly) self-contained software systems, as in Office or even Blender, which appear to the user as such. However, a function from libmoz.so that returned, say, an HTTP packet, when used in a library designed with tax forms in mind, would probably not fit into that category, though the FSF might be able, through good lawyering, to persuade judge and jury, and RMS would simply have a heart attack and croak all at once.
Actually, it was SE. I was never insulted or anything; I just felt like I was in a sea of people who didn't actually care about much of anything, who weren't doing what they loved, and who, as a result, were not very satisfied.
To be honest, that was only a part (one of many) of the reasons for my switch. I'm also back home (area, not living with 'rents) where I enjoy living (despite the fact that everyone here hates the area), and I enjoy reading a lot. I started off my Freshman year with Tolkien, Salinger and Dickens. Funny thing is, now I'm reading GEB (finishing the latter half), O'Reilly's "Understanding the Linux Kernel", and a host of other, more scientific books.
Also, a lot of introspection was involved (as always), and I found myself becoming a totally different person, though not only for the usual away-from-home, need-to-learn-how-to-survive reasons.
That's part of the reason I left RIT. It seemed like no one there actually *cared* about what they were doing. I remember spending the summer after my freshman year reading Godel, Escher, Bach, and then finding out that none of the professors there had even heard of it.
The sad part is, most people anywhere don't seem to have a *real* love for much of anything, and so I've decided to become a writer: if I'm going to be in the minority, I may as well work alone with my passion for things.
I'm sorry... are you saying that despite the NATURE of the ARTICLE and the fact that SEVERAL OTHER APRIL FOOLS ARTICLES HAVE BEEN POSTED you still needed a FREAKING CLUE TO PROVE IT TO YOU???/me runs and hides in an underground cave until nuclear winter wipes out cynical people who can't sit back and enjoy the jokes without posting "I figured out the obvious" are wiped out by nuclear winter
It occurs to me that average people see *everything* as not only a "magic box" but what we often refer to as a "black box". Systems of politics, society, religion, ad infinitum flabbergast anyone who's not willing to use their (insert deity)-given senses and mental abilities.
I'm taking a Linguistics course this semester, and I've always found things like this interesting. You make several good points, but I feel that, like most doubters, you oversimplify trial as inevitable failure. You have to be careful when saying things like "Linux won't catch on," "Artificial Intelligence won't happen," or "phonemes are too hard to separate."
In fact, much of what you've said indicates the *eventual* possibility of a very conversable TTS/STT translating algorithm. (Whether or not these will be the same algorithm in reverse will be for the future to decide).
"Phonemes" don't just start and end neatly - they overlap massively. A single vowel can affect maybe the preceding four segments and the following six because of the effects of reconfiguring your vocal tract. The next sound might do the same. And the next one... As you can probably imagine, it's a pretty messy picture really. Believe me, I have suffered greatly trying to segment voice spectra by hand.
Right there, you've laid out a *very complicated* but by no means difficult way of looking at phonemes individually. In my class, we have some 20 people who all have great difficulty in just figuring out allomorphs, which some Slashdotters might not know are phonemes either in complementary distribution, such as in the case of plural nouns:/s/ sound at the end of/kæts/ {cats}/z/ sound at the end of/kIdz/ {kids}/z/ sound at the end of/mæz/ {matches}
or in free variation, such as the Lisa/Liza name which mean the same thing, and are derived from the same root, but which have split due to geographical/cultural/other reasons.
Now, where the average English major might not always recognize similarities and patterns, the average Slashdotter has trained him/herself to do so, and some are likely saying to themselves, "where else does this happen?" and "where is this not true?", which are useful, scientific questions.
You yourself present the answer to the problem you raise: we have to look at the surrounding phonemes in order to figure out how to make one particular sound fit the word it's in. This is *damn hard*, but not impossible. It's like the fact that stress affects a phoneme in certain languages: we just need to adapt to thinking about language in different terms than simply speaking it and spelling vague representations of it (by first realizing how vague those representations are, which is why the phoneme set is taught first in Linguistics classes).
Personally, I think the problem lies in the fact that we all want TTS/STT and we want it *now!*, and why can't the computer just say it or hear it the way we do, and all the other questions that come from a lack of understanding, both of how the machine represents everything and the garbled way in which our language is represented. Phonemes are the obvious solution: the software should only have to do STP/PTS conversion, and our language should conform to that, really, since it's the creative dialectical shifts that create a problem, but we'll end up devising a creative solution for that, too.
Now, we all know what happens with lossy compression...
Yes, we get a slightly inaccurate but highly useful jpeg of the Andes, or someone's new desktop widget set, or a very listenable 192kbps mp3 of "Hurt" covered by Johnny Cash (even sadder than the original, IMHO).
And TTS/STT will have its flaws as well, but a digital (though wide) set of sound symbols like phonemes will help us to break things down somewhat until we figure out that something *smaller* about those sounds is very functional, *and* how to represent *that* level of speech, just as we represented matter by some informal type, then by molecules, then atoms, and now we know quite a bit about how the electron, proton and neutron work, and are working on a smaller level.
To say you "don't really believe in phonemes" oversi
I just got me a *sweet* '89 Dodge Dakota with a cap. The heat doesn't work, so I have frost inside the cab.
The point (besides telling several other people that I have a *sweet* '89 Dodge Dakota) is that the weather is harsh around here. I doubt a standard PC case would do at all. Any ideas?
I just recently bought this book at a book sale. Very good, and the imagery is amazing. It documents Einstein's thoughts in novel form and interjects with meetings he had with his friend Besso, wherein he tried to explain his want for understanding.
What made me cry the most was the realization that Einstein thought very much the way I did. If only people understood how simple -- yet dedicated -- true genius is, fewer people would be afraid of science and technology.
Slashdot Mirror
Maybe SCO is a legitimate company after all. Sounds like a typical tech company to me, with employees focusing on hardware rather than feminine beauty.
very much dealt with in TFA, so R it, please?!?
Sorry, what were the reasons for which you hoped a republican would go to a Pro Hemp rally?
Didn't mean to but in on your well-thought-out post, but my giggle-itch got the best of me. Carry on, and good luck!
Go ahead, finish it... "computer destroys YOU!"
Strangely enough, that's the point they were trying to make!!!
RMS: Who the hell are these "Z" people, and why are they stealing my thunder???
I'm not saying Linux is the most secure thing since sliced bread
With apologies to the writers of "Friends": Ah, sliced bread; a fine server OS.
The armchair lawyers to which you refer are reading the license as emphasized above. This implies that, yes, even that one simple function does constitute a basis for a "work based on the Program".
However, the judge and jury would most likely see the license as:
which implies rather that the new work would have to provide similar functionality, or that the portion of that work for which that code is used would have to provide similar funcionality when compared to the original Program from whence it came. That is, a math library used in a tax program, if it used similar code to some GNU library libmath.so, would fall under the category so long as the judge and jury understood the KISS concept of small programs and libraries working together, as in the UNIX philosophy, as opposed to complex, (mostly) self-contained software systems, as in Office or even Blender, which appear to the user as such. However, a function from libmoz.so that returned, say, an HTTP packet, when used in a library designed with tax forms in mind, would probably not fit into that category, though the FSF might be able, through good lawyering, to persuade judge and jury, and RMS would simply have a heart attack and croak all at once.
Daisy - Linux
Oh, so *that's* why I get horny when I think about re-compiling my kernel!
Your homework for the weekend: a ten-page report on the unsettling feeling you had while watching your rented copy of "The Insider"
Actually, it was SE. I was never insulted or anything; I just felt like I was in a sea of people who didn't actually care about much of anything, who weren't doing what they loved, and who, as a result, were not very satisfied.
To be honest, that was only a part (one of many) of the reasons for my switch. I'm also back home (area, not living with 'rents) where I enjoy living (despite the fact that everyone here hates the area), and I enjoy reading a lot. I started off my Freshman year with Tolkien, Salinger and Dickens. Funny thing is, now I'm reading GEB (finishing the latter half), O'Reilly's "Understanding the Linux Kernel", and a host of other, more scientific books.
Also, a lot of introspection was involved (as always), and I found myself becoming a totally different person, though not only for the usual away-from-home, need-to-learn-how-to-survive reasons.
That's part of the reason I left RIT. It seemed like no one there actually *cared* about what they were doing. I remember spending the summer after my freshman year reading Godel, Escher, Bach, and then finding out that none of the professors there had even heard of it.
The sad part is, most people anywhere don't seem to have a *real* love for much of anything, and so I've decided to become a writer: if I'm going to be in the minority, I may as well work alone with my passion for things.
...a game programming competition for students held in Sweden...
If the poor bastards are being held in Sweden, it's the least that can be done to raise their esteem!
Let's get Tina Yothers et al together to try and free them!
...in comparison to a cell phone...?
;)
for the humor impaired:
I'm sorry... are you saying that despite the NATURE of the ARTICLE and the fact that SEVERAL OTHER APRIL FOOLS ARTICLES HAVE BEEN POSTED you still needed a FREAKING CLUE TO PROVE IT TO YOU??? /me runs and hides in an underground cave until nuclear winter wipes out cynical people who can't sit back and enjoy the jokes without posting "I figured out the obvious" are wiped out by nuclear winter
It occurs to me that average people see *everything* as not only a "magic box" but what we often refer to as a "black box". Systems of politics, society, religion, ad infinitum flabbergast anyone who's not willing to use their (insert deity)-given senses and mental abilities.
I'm taking a Linguistics course this semester, and I've always found things like this interesting. You make several good points, but I feel that, like most doubters, you oversimplify trial as inevitable failure. You have to be careful when saying things like "Linux won't catch on," "Artificial Intelligence won't happen," or "phonemes are too hard to separate."
/s/ sound at the end of /kæts/ {cats} /z/ sound at the end of /kIdz/ {kids} /z/ sound at the end of /mæz/ {matches}
In fact, much of what you've said indicates the *eventual* possibility of a very conversable TTS/STT translating algorithm. (Whether or not these will be the same algorithm in reverse will be for the future to decide).
"Phonemes" don't just start and end neatly - they overlap massively. A single vowel can affect maybe the preceding four segments and the following six because of the effects of reconfiguring your vocal tract. The next sound might do the same. And the next one... As you can probably imagine, it's a pretty messy picture really. Believe me, I have suffered greatly trying to segment voice spectra by hand.
Right there, you've laid out a *very complicated* but by no means difficult way of looking at phonemes individually. In my class, we have some 20 people who all have great difficulty in just figuring out allomorphs, which some Slashdotters might not know are phonemes either in complementary distribution, such as in the case of plural nouns:
or in free variation, such as the Lisa/Liza name which mean the same thing, and are derived from the same root, but which have split due to geographical/cultural/other reasons.
Now, where the average English major might not always recognize similarities and patterns, the average Slashdotter has trained him/herself to do so, and some are likely saying to themselves, "where else does this happen?" and "where is this not true?", which are useful, scientific questions.
You yourself present the answer to the problem you raise: we have to look at the surrounding phonemes in order to figure out how to make one particular sound fit the word it's in. This is *damn hard*, but not impossible. It's like the fact that stress affects a phoneme in certain languages: we just need to adapt to thinking about language in different terms than simply speaking it and spelling vague representations of it (by first realizing how vague those representations are, which is why the phoneme set is taught first in Linguistics classes).
Personally, I think the problem lies in the fact that we all want TTS/STT and we want it *now!*, and why can't the computer just say it or hear it the way we do, and all the other questions that come from a lack of understanding, both of how the machine represents everything and the garbled way in which our language is represented. Phonemes are the obvious solution: the software should only have to do STP/PTS conversion, and our language should conform to that, really, since it's the creative dialectical shifts that create a problem, but we'll end up devising a creative solution for that, too.
Now, we all know what happens with lossy compression...
Yes, we get a slightly inaccurate but highly useful jpeg of the Andes, or someone's new desktop widget set, or a very listenable 192kbps mp3 of "Hurt" covered by Johnny Cash (even sadder than the original, IMHO).
And TTS/STT will have its flaws as well, but a digital (though wide) set of sound symbols like phonemes will help us to break things down somewhat until we figure out that something *smaller* about those sounds is very functional, *and* how to represent *that* level of speech, just as we represented matter by some informal type, then by molecules, then atoms, and now we know quite a bit about how the electron, proton and neutron work, and are working on a smaller level.
To say you "don't really believe in phonemes" oversi
The two *are* sharing a disk.
Sit still! Behave! Dammit, don't make me get the hose!
but not too much!
I think you've overlooked XML.
Ant1: Quick! Save the queen!
Ant2: Which one's the queen?
Ant1: I thought you were the queen!
I just got me a *sweet* '89 Dodge Dakota with a cap. The heat doesn't work, so I have frost inside the cab.
The point (besides telling several other people that I have a *sweet* '89 Dodge Dakota) is that the weather is harsh around here. I doubt a standard PC case would do at all. Any ideas?
I just recently bought this book at a book sale. Very good, and the imagery is amazing. It documents Einstein's thoughts in novel form and interjects with meetings he had with his friend Besso, wherein he tried to explain his want for understanding.
What made me cry the most was the realization that Einstein thought very much the way I did. If only people understood how simple -- yet dedicated -- true genius is, fewer people would be afraid of science and technology.
to give a story a better headline. This one's much more clever. ; )
She's, like, going to be traumatized about this forever, like.
Hey! I will *not* have you ridiculing my future wife!
For that matter, the following are also off-limits:
Natalie Portman
Jena Malone
Leelee Sobieski
Amy Smart
I will update this list as I see fit. Thank you for your kindness.