No, this statement is incorrect. It can be very hard to comply to all standards though because there are ambiguities in the documentation published by the W3C. That's one of the reasons they release new revisions to their standards, btw.
Ahh, so what this is really all about is that they've found support for why our universe weren't annihilated in an instant after the big bang due to a symmetry of particles and anti-particles. That they've found support for the six-quark theory that in turn open up the possibility, right in our Standard Model, for the particle-heavy universe we observe? Suddenly the outcome doesn't sound nearly as useless as ScienceDaily presented and well worth three years of calculations.
When asked about Red Hat or Oracle's support-oriented model, he called them 'a minority Yes, so..? Is that supposed to be a "problem" here?
Obviously, Red Hat's and Oracle's (and a number of others not mentioned) business models works, otherwise they would have been abandoned in favor of the more traditional ones. And whether they work is what matters here, not how many have or haven't dared trying something new!
This requires a rational, knowable system to even be reasonable to attempt. If you don't have the source, you cannot know it--and I don't give a damn how wonderful your knowledge base is. Whoops! I've never analyzed the details and intricaties of the Apache source code -- I guess I'd make a bad webmaster.:-(
But I must say it seems you put the bar quite high!
I thought people who prefer Windows tended to like command lines,which would explain they preference in OS and why Linux is so often lambasted as being geeky. They aren't taking away the UI.
Since command lines is more "geeky", but also often more powerful, they're now including this.
By providing this choice, they're trying to approach broader markets.
Doesn't seem confusing, strange, a bad idea, or anything like that. It's a good idea in all aspects I can think of.
Btw, the "registry as a file system" (similar to the architecture Linux uses for all sorts of abstract "devices") is a documented API one can write own "providers" for.
Number two being that it most likely still relies on that crap Registry schema for all of its settings. At least it can now navigate and modify the registry like it was a file system, thanks to the (admittedly ridiculously named) Windows PowerShell.
The reason privacy safeguards need to be in place is because the people working at the IRS and other organizations are just regular people too. They are not "better" at handling power than anyone else.
Or will online distribution overtake it? Granted, I've seen ~5 GB HD movies spread on The Pirate Bay, and they seem to be of good enough quality, despite being much more heavily compressed than their 25 GB variants. But I don't think I'd want to go much lower if this is still about 1080p movies. And then, the question becomes how much of a hassle downloading a 5 GB movie might be? For me on a 100 Mbps connection, not so much in theory, but it's 1) still very common with much slower DSL lines, and 2) the problem with centralized bogged down servers probably not reaching your full capacity. Especially not if downloading internationally. And I wouldn't really bet on these companies daring to move to P2P technologies... That probably comes off as too scary for them, still.:-p
So while I'm not a conspiracy nut, I do believe one of Microsoft's goals here are to assist the process of those binary formats becoming obsolete, to drive Office 2007/2008 adoption. Not a chance. Microsoft is bound to release Office 2003 security updates until January 14, 2014.
Ironically, Wikipedia is one among few encyclopedias that do this. Not for all facts, far from it, but for a fair number of facts. For example, Wikipedia has three references for the mass of the Milky Way, and you can also see which referenced were used for that sole claim. You won't be able to see that by using Britannica.
that only confirms that wikipedia is not a reliable source. This argument is getting sort of tiresome to me. In well written Wikipedia articles, key facts are often referenced today. This then becomes a blanket argument against Wikipedia as a whole, without caring for whether the information was well referenced or not. Often, it is. Sure, often it's not too, but IMHO, one need to check that out first.
This time, you've already received your answer to why Wikipedia had this information, and it's in fact not a long time ago I've had to do the same.
So, please guys, before you bash Wikipedia, check if there's a good reason to the discrepancy of the information. Surprisingly often, especially in articles receiving good attention like the one for our galaxy, there is.
Ah, I see I missed the part in the article saying fusion reactions would maybe not start. Hmm, yes then, I also think it would be borderline to actually call them stars? After all, brown dwarves are called "failed" stars, because they never get the fusion reactions going due to too low mass.
If these early objects were actually composited of dark matter, wouldn't they be something else? Not if the dark matter would collect into clumps of matter through gravity to kickstart fusion reactions and turn it into balls of plasma.
I've done you a favor by performing the test and giving you a heads up in the first place! I don't owe you anything. Opera was never claiming Mozilla was bound by law and did anything wrong per se; they just wished to have seen it handled a bit differently because apparently it usually is in this business, even for being Mozilla.
When you hide the bug, you're hiding the ability for the users to take steps to protect themselves. Yes, it's definitely a case of finding an equilibrium when being curteous in giving software developers around the world affected by the same vulnerability a reasonable time to adapt.
So by hiding the details of the exploit, you make sure that only the more skillful and malicious hackers have the exploit. Does that sound like a good idea to you? No, of course the details should be revealed in time. This is just a discussion of how long said time should be out of courtesy.
but Saturn has a lot of moons already, so clearly Saturn is getting moons somehow. Yeah, by capturing objects, like most other planets are theorized to have done.
Slashdot Mirror
No, this statement is incorrect. It can be very hard to comply to all standards though because there are ambiguities in the documentation published by the W3C. That's one of the reasons they release new revisions to their standards, btw.
Ahh, so what this is really all about is that they've found support for why our universe weren't annihilated in an instant after the big bang due to a symmetry of particles and anti-particles. That they've found support for the six-quark theory that in turn open up the possibility, right in our Standard Model, for the particle-heavy universe we observe? Suddenly the outcome doesn't sound nearly as useless as ScienceDaily presented and well worth three years of calculations.
And only one site legitimately used for http://www.fascism.com/
Obviously, Red Hat's and Oracle's (and a number of others not mentioned) business models works, otherwise they would have been abandoned in favor of the more traditional ones. And whether they work is what matters here, not how many have or haven't dared trying something new!
I'm not sure, he was after all talking about me "understanding" my server software through the source.
But I must say it seems you put the bar quite high!
Since command lines is more "geeky", but also often more powerful, they're now including this.
By providing this choice, they're trying to approach broader markets.
Doesn't seem confusing, strange, a bad idea, or anything like that. It's a good idea in all aspects I can think of.
Btw, the "registry as a file system" (similar to the architecture Linux uses for all sorts of abstract "devices") is a documented API one can write own "providers" for.
Also, here's a video interview with the Vista kernel team on the topic of the Windows Registry among other things, and why it has remained.
That the police probably really may watch Jerry Springer with a beer when they're done at work?
It's not that they're super humans, nothing says they can actually handle the power they have in terms of this.
I *know* that every now and then, these sort of regulations are broken at hospitals, why would the police be different?
The reason privacy safeguards need to be in place is because the people working at the IRS and other organizations are just regular people too. They are not "better" at handling power than anyone else.
A: The more flops, the more powerful it grows.
Concise, elegant and minimalistic, just like his beard.
No wait...
At least it's doing something right, then!
Ironically, Wikipedia is one among few encyclopedias that do this. Not for all facts, far from it, but for a fair number of facts. For example, Wikipedia has three references for the mass of the Milky Way, and you can also see which referenced were used for that sole claim. You won't be able to see that by using Britannica.
This time, you've already received your answer to why Wikipedia had this information, and it's in fact not a long time ago I've had to do the same.
So, please guys, before you bash Wikipedia, check if there's a good reason to the discrepancy of the information. Surprisingly often, especially in articles receiving good attention like the one for our galaxy, there is.
Ah, I see I missed the part in the article saying fusion reactions would maybe not start. Hmm, yes then, I also think it would be borderline to actually call them stars? After all, brown dwarves are called "failed" stars, because they never get the fusion reactions going due to too low mass.