Funny how you only seem to be responding to the average media coverage and not the facts. Was no one interested or was the media (even non-mainstream) not interested? Plenty of investigations occurred. You apparently just didn't hear about them.
Really. Is there a better example of "enemy of the state"? These people are doing more damage by undermining the government than any "enemy combatant".
He can be impeached. The public's representatives in congress can remove him from office. Personally I believe Bush, Cheney, Rice, and this attorney general should all be impeached. All of their offenses are quite clear.
Forced upgrades come from corporate support contracts. Microsoft could choose to support one version of Word for 10+ years with minor upgrades. Instead they put out whole new versions with different file formats but add almost no new features. Then they drop support for old versions. Since corporations need support they are forced to upgrade with no added value what-so-ever.
And before you mention the continual upgrade cycle of supported linux distros, remember that each new major revision has many feature changes (hardware support, file systems, etc). Word and Excel have barely changed in the last 10 years. If they were written properly all new features would be programmed as plug-ins to a core app which rarely needs to change.
I'm not talking about Wikipedia's ranking or URLs. I'm talking about the other sites that are linked to from Wikipedia. To search engines there is value in the fact that Wikipedia links to a site.
which renders those links invisible to search engines.
Uh, not really. The big search engines choose to not follow those links.
Using nofollow reduces the incentive for spammers, but in this case it will hurt search engines. Google wants to provide the most worthy links at the top of search results. Being linked from wikipedia is supposed to denote reliable sources or very relevant information. Therefore Google is slightly more accurate for having those links to follow in wikipedia. The nofollow will make search engines slightly less useful.
Or try getting a job, but refuse to give out your social security number.
Well, in that particular case it's one of only 2 times you should have to give out that number. Once to contribute to social security, and once to withdraw. It makes sense a job requires it since the government requires it of the employer.
Agreed. If these people broke the law they should spend the rest of their lives in jail. They took away a fundamental freedom of the people of their county. As a result their freedom should be taken away.
So, does that mean once these non-proprietary tests are created the process will be made more open? I agree, any step in the right direction is something good. I just hope that in the end we have real transparency.
The luxury car edition doesn't come with the luxury features. When you download a linux distro you can use everything in it. When you get Windows you can only use what Microsoft unlocks, even though it's all there on your machine. In XP they even lock how many processors the system will use. I don't consider allowing me to use of my processors a bonus feature of an OS.
Wouldn't it be even cooler if it weren't crippled? I mean, imagine actually getting access to every feature of the OS on your machine just buy getting the basic license.
Not true. As the AC above states, it does matter to governments who are finally starting to demand open standards for documents. The US government is Microsoft's largest customer. Microsoft would lose them if they finally decided to only use applications that have documented and standard file formats.
In my opinion there are two reasons Microsoft is trying to create their own standard: PR and government contracts. The PR aspect is obvious. The US government is Microsoft's largest customer (by far) and also the most likely to demand open document standards. Other governments will likely do the same long before corporations demand it. So Microsoft needs to have their own standard which they implement first in order to get the contracts.
They don't have to implement it correctly. They can claim support for a standard for years without actually following it (e.g. CSS, Kerberos, etc.) and still get the contracts. They were actually involved in creating some CSS standards and still didn't follow them.
It's all about the money. Get the big contracts and nothing else matters.
Re:Speaking of statistics
on
Who won?
·
· Score: 1
Slashdot Mirror
Funny how you only seem to be responding to the average media coverage and not the facts. Was no one interested or was the media (even non-mainstream) not interested? Plenty of investigations occurred. You apparently just didn't hear about them.
The problem isn't the decentralized standards. Once they're centralized the standards will probably still be inadequate.
It's a thorny legal issue, all right. I'll need to refer to the case of Finders v. Keepers.
its point is to break apart the notion of a different spellcheck with a different dictionary for every single application on your system.
n ceptual/SpellCheck/SpellCheck.html
Meaning the OS should provide the spell-checking functionality to application developers? Done: http://developer.apple.com/documentation/Cocoa/Co
I don't see anything else here that Linux/OSX hotkeys or the command line doesn't do.
Please vote to give this comment the concatenated-words-need-hyphens-to-be-readable mod :).
He's doing it for the SEO. Bold words help pages rank higher in google for those keywords.
Really. Is there a better example of "enemy of the state"? These people are doing more damage by undermining the government than any "enemy combatant".
He can be impeached. The public's representatives in congress can remove him from office. Personally I believe Bush, Cheney, Rice, and this attorney general should all be impeached. All of their offenses are quite clear.
Forced upgrades come from corporate support contracts. Microsoft could choose to support one version of Word for 10+ years with minor upgrades. Instead they put out whole new versions with different file formats but add almost no new features. Then they drop support for old versions. Since corporations need support they are forced to upgrade with no added value what-so-ever.
And before you mention the continual upgrade cycle of supported linux distros, remember that each new major revision has many feature changes (hardware support, file systems, etc). Word and Excel have barely changed in the last 10 years. If they were written properly all new features would be programmed as plug-ins to a core app which rarely needs to change.
The intent seems more prevention than prosecution.
Wouldn't either side of these debates violate the neutral point of view policy of wikipedia? Aren't all of those opinions supposed to be deleted?
I'm not talking about Wikipedia's ranking or URLs. I'm talking about the other sites that are linked to from Wikipedia. To search engines there is value in the fact that Wikipedia links to a site.
which renders those links invisible to search engines.
Uh, not really. The big search engines choose to not follow those links.
Using nofollow reduces the incentive for spammers, but in this case it will hurt search engines. Google wants to provide the most worthy links at the top of search results. Being linked from wikipedia is supposed to denote reliable sources or very relevant information. Therefore Google is slightly more accurate for having those links to follow in wikipedia. The nofollow will make search engines slightly less useful.
"They traditionally have been very conservative in their adoption of new technologies and new tools"
That's an exceptionally ironic statement to make about an organization responsible for space exploration.
Or try getting a job, but refuse to give out your social security number.
Well, in that particular case it's one of only 2 times you should have to give out that number. Once to contribute to social security, and once to withdraw. It makes sense a job requires it since the government requires it of the employer.
Agreed. If these people broke the law they should spend the rest of their lives in jail. They took away a fundamental freedom of the people of their county. As a result their freedom should be taken away.
And if standards exist, maybe more companies can compete equally for the contracts.
With electronics, the biggest issue is the tallying, not as much the method of voting. Tallying can be corrupt with no voter noticing.
So, does that mean once these non-proprietary tests are created the process will be made more open? I agree, any step in the right direction is something good. I just hope that in the end we have real transparency.
The luxury car edition doesn't come with the luxury features. When you download a linux distro you can use everything in it. When you get Windows you can only use what Microsoft unlocks, even though it's all there on your machine. In XP they even lock how many processors the system will use. I don't consider allowing me to use of my processors a bonus feature of an OS.
Wouldn't it be even cooler if it weren't crippled? I mean, imagine actually getting access to every feature of the OS on your machine just buy getting the basic license.
Not true. As the AC above states, it does matter to governments who are finally starting to demand open standards for documents. The US government is Microsoft's largest customer. Microsoft would lose them if they finally decided to only use applications that have documented and standard file formats.
In my opinion there are two reasons Microsoft is trying to create their own standard: PR and government contracts. The PR aspect is obvious. The US government is Microsoft's largest customer (by far) and also the most likely to demand open document standards. Other governments will likely do the same long before corporations demand it. So Microsoft needs to have their own standard which they implement first in order to get the contracts.
They don't have to implement it correctly. They can claim support for a standard for years without actually following it (e.g. CSS, Kerberos, etc.) and still get the contracts. They were actually involved in creating some CSS standards and still didn't follow them.
It's all about the money. Get the big contracts and nothing else matters.
Testimony of the unwitting programmer
Can you please cite some examples of Microsoft using submarine patents.
Here ya go: Microsoft Patents