and it's not like, say, in the fifties... we used foreign scientists to, say, help build up our military again in the name of safety. except back then, we'd just -finished- a war with the germans, and i guess we felt safe taking their scientists to defeat the russians? and we seem just fine with buying japan-made cars and equipment... even though we had to nuke them to end the war quickly... but we're afraid of -random- foreign students, because we have a problem with a few isolated terrorist groups? talk about killing the patient to cure him...
"Maybe their germans are better than our germans" (The Right Stuff)
isn't that where microsoft moves from the secure-audio-channel system to a secure-video-channel, with the hope you won't be able to extract the video back out of the video card itself... and instead have to take a video camera to the screen, the way you'd take a tape recorder to your audio-out? yes, it's always accessible. but they'll hope to make it hard to copy -- for example, don't use functions that allow copy-pasting (just draw to a canvas, such that you have to do the screenshot thing) then modify the text so ocr software can't make it out (antialias a bit, change the colors randomly... do what some sites are doing now to prevent scripts from creating accounts -- put broken text on even more broken backgrounds with filters applied so only the human eye can really tell what's there...) this would at least prevent plain-text/html renderings of the original text, and force you to distribute images... which won't work any better with text-to-speech or other plugin/filter/layers you might want between you and your book. it's actually much easier for them to render text readable to the human eye but not to software than for them to make music that can be even remotely enjoyed whilst not being recordable...
Unfortunately, not everyone is so generous. Even if everyone were, in general, rather kind and loving like you, this wouldn't be a -guarantee- from the point of view of a government. And if the government sets as one of its basic requirements that it will not allow its citizens to die of starvation or lack of shelter (because they are citizens, and we care for pets better than that,) then it simply cannot allow its poorest members to be supported only by vaguely reliable charity. It simply can't, as a matter of protocol. And how can it pay to make sure that, under all circumstances, money will be available with which to support the needy? Taxes. Socialism. Because, quite frankly, humans aren't reliable.
Would you like to be poor, on the streets, and for whatever reason unable to feed yourself (despite dearly wanting to work for it) and be forced to hear from the government: "Thank you for your request. However, we have outsourced all aid to the needy to the general population. It is recommended that you find a church, or charitable people, or some sort of community center, to find help. If that doesn't work, please feel free to go door to door begging. Just don't beg too much, or after hours, or we'll have to send the police out to quiet you. Thank you, and we hope it works out for you. And if you do die... please try to die somewhere discreet. Cleaning up dead bodies under bridges is also volunteer work."
you just reminded me of a gem which i left out of my previous post... from that night (i took very careful notes on my cassiopeia, under the watchful eye of many a little old lady)...
"Because science self-corrects, scientists can't know everything about everything [...] thus, can they know anything about anything? But God knows all."
The guy also went to a lot of trouble to prove that dinosaurs existed five hundred years ago and were hunted by northern europeans to extinction. The T-Rex couldn't go any faster than three miles an hour, and would fall over if he tried to go any faster, killing himself. He also had teeth that would fall out if he tried to bring down his own prey, but worked fine for scavanging. Why all this? Well, partially because of Romans 5:12 "Therefore just as through one man sin entered the world, and death through sin..." and Corithians 15:21 "For since by man came death, by Man came life and the resurrection from dead..." (pardon me if i misquote, this is from my notes, not a current translation.) Thus, death didn't exist before sin. Understand -- the man believes that although animals cam first, none of them ate. Not for several days. They just went without, unless they were non-carnivore. Thus... either God gave them sharp pointy teeth and the instinct to kill prey out of spite (watch them mope around, not killing anything) or he planned that sin would happen, and would -then- let these poor creatures loose on each other. We couldn't decide which was funnier.
[offtopic] I'm myself agnostic, rather than atheist. I don't believe I have the means of telling if there is or is not a god of any sort. Not that it matters much -- even a simple theist (without selecting a faith) doesn't do much but believe in a god, somewhere, somehow. Pray? Without selecting a specific god, you don't have history, therefore you hardly have any 'properties' of the god... so you can't tell what he/she is all about, or what good it may do to pray. The list goes on. But still -- agnostic, not atheist. And I went to a southern-baptist university, where the science class was more about proving that science doesn't have all the answers (that the bible scholars do) than about showing what answers it has found (fairly reliably.) [/offtopic]
i went to a talk given at a local church a few months ago on creationism. it was disturbing -- their motto was "teaching disciples to trust the bible's history for its accuracy, so that they will trust the bible's promise for their destiny"... the basic problem was that these people so closely tied literal interpretation of biblical texts to their understanding of it as a whole that they could not deviate from it one bit, or the rest would fall apart too. you simply could not tell them that genesis might have been an abridged, simplified, or cliff's-notes version of what happened, or their entire faith would simply collapse. (this was demonstrated when he explained that evolution would imply the lack of a literal adam and eve, thus nullifying the whole story of sin.)
even if you get away from literal interpretation, you still wind up with the calvinist problem -- so maybe god did create the universe, and we are an emergent property. either that means nothing, and god didn't really foresee us any more than he did the newly discovered jovian moon, or he did plan it -- and planning that far ahead means planning a lot of other things too. intelligent-design proponents stress how finely tuned the universe had to be. they do so to such a degree that -not- finding the universe predestined becomes difficult. saying that god didn't plan us means that the christ story becomes odd -- why would god care about just one planet? or all planets? or... all species? it opens up far more doors than it closes. and if you say god did plan it all... well, you really didn't have a choice -- god meant for you to have acne and get beat up in school as a kid. yup. and your dog dying? god did that. on purpose.
and yes -- since everybody else was on vacation, -somebody- had to fill in for the trolls.
The scary thing about cults is that they have total control and are well funded. In many regards cults and islamic militant groups are not too dissimilar.
you're only hitting the tip of the iceberg. islamic militant groups, like most extreme religious groups, do not represent the core values of their main faith. sect groups of any sort are considered dangerous because, as small groups, their beliefs may vary widely and go unchecked... resulting in surprise attacks from before-unheard-of groups. but what we rarely see is that even mainstream religions are, at a certain point, sect groups. consider the relationship between protestants and catholics? protestants were born of an ideological revolution against mainstream catholic control. right now, iranian students are protesting that their government sentenced a man to death for suggesting a new path for islam in his country -- that individuals be able to interpret their faith on their own. but even catholics, and all christians, are a sect branching off of the older jewish faith... just as islam is. at each branch, people believed, deep down, they were doing what was right for themselves. and when they became extremists, they believed they were doing what was right for everybody else too. now consider the spin this puts on things like separation of church and state -- does a mainstream religion become oppressive the moment it gains a foot in the government of a country, regardless of whether its actions are good or bad? we already have laws that apply to all of us, even when we don't all agree. laws based on religious belief would be no different -- some of us believe one thing, some another... it's hard to distinguish, in a democracy (of sorts) whether our laws are based on religious lobbying or individual beliefs -- because a single faith my have sway over a majority of the people in the country. do you ban an opinion or an experiment because of its source? thus, if a government gives money to somebody to experiment... or in any way funds projects that -may- be related to an idea spawned, at some point, by a religious concept... are we breaking separation of church and state? are we giving in to sect groups, funding them, aiding them to oppress the rest of the population? is it oppression, when we believe differently from those of a certain group, and force our government to uphold our ideals rather than theirs?
most of us believe the state has one rule -- that it shall govern how we interact with each other, but stay out of our personal business. (not the case in some states, by the way, that have rules about how you may go about romping in bed with even your wife...) in the case of cloning, what's the test? same class (DNA)... different instance (child.) who is the government going to protect? and from what?
group discussion.
Re:better: just slow down the connection
on
Next-Gen Pop-up Ads
·
· Score: 1
here's a question -- does windows have the same limitation linux does with the maximum number of file handles that can be open at once? i know it can be increased dynamically now, but most places, i would expect, haven't...
how 'bout taking your idea, but doing it at least 8192 times all at once -- take up all the handles, and then use them excrutiatingly slowly. if one finishes (magically) start a new one.
if i own an object and drop it on the side of the road, and don't come back for months... that doesn't change the fact that i own the object. if someone else comes along and asks if it's been abandoned -- the answer is probably yes. the question is then: if he/she picks it up and uses it, is that illegal? will anyone come after him/her for doing so?
even if i own the object and -could- complain, by having abandoned it i've stopped paying attention. thus, it's rather safe to use, even though it's someone's property. not by legality, but by practicality.
I'm trying to teach myself C without having to un-learn bad habits, so it helps to see the kind of things I should look out for.
so... you're my worst nightmare? which bad habits do you have that you want to keep? were they learnt from another (dreaded) language like basic?
as to caps -- how 'bout just junking the whole idea. i've had enough problems at work with users not understanding that if we don't use just one case (uppercase) in the database, they'll go putting random case in there, especially lots of all-uppercase data. which really doesn't fit well on reports. and isn't correct. but they're -sure- we need to let them uppercase/lowercase to their heart's desire. (yes, we wrote algorithms specific to the english language to re-capitalize... works most of the time, has trouble catching proper nouns and acronyms unless 'dotted')...
must i remind you that you don't buy from pricewatch, but from any one of the many (usually) small webstores they represent and group? there are, in fact, some reputable stores listed there as well. in fact, the fact that pricewatch exists is a good thing -- it gives us a good idea of just how cheap you can get something. you don't have to buy it at that price (i usually don't, because i want better service) but it can tell you which places are completely ripping you off. and it's a great deal for the stores -- they can afford to sell you one hot item each at a completely ridiculous price and just hope you'll buy other stuff at a more reasonable price while you're at it. works for them, works for you... compare this to ads in the newspaper where the latest dvd releases may not have a price marked, but instead have "everyday low price" instead...
might mention that firebird has support under php, for those who care... i use it in a windows/builder/c++ environment primarily, but we've built quite a few websites using it. VERY small memory footprint, compared to the competition. it is very complete, constantly improved, and the mailing lists are actually helpful =) (usually)...
i really hate running into programmers who suck at database design -- they usually also suck at memory-structure design, algorithm design, etc. because they can't think the problems through, logically. cardinality is not a simple thing for a lot of people -- but it's not complicated either. and yet i've met some bright programmers and accountants (ugh) who just couldn't get it. foreign keys for no reason, text fields used to contain comma-separated lists of text-versions of the names of departments (numeric id's anyone? that already exist? in another table? agh!)
perhaps i'm an idiot -- but i've never gotten that to work. for the zaurus, it seems you need to setup an http proxy on the machine you're connecting through. for the casio i have,... activesync by itself refuses. is it only on MS Windows CE 2002 (not 2000?) not that i really want to browse the net from a 320x240 screen on a casio attached to a USB cradle... but... well... no, i really don't actually.
as we're reminded all the way through college by our profs. right before a paper is due... don't believe anything and everything you find on the internet, just because it's there. in the same way, if you post comments about a company defrauding its customers without posting your background information on the claim, those reading it should know better than to believe you. that's always been the case -- yes, we're hurt when someone lies. but when they don't provide much info, shouldn't we also be responsible for looking into the issue? the main reason we can at all sue people for outrageous claims is that if done correctly, you can convince people and get a mob going in no time. witch hunts? burning at the stake? passionate messages may overrule any insight people have into your lies. but really... is that not the listener's fault?
i'll try to seem less controversial in the future -- it's easy on slashdot to seem radical (especially radically anti-american... very sensitive on that one.) if you've got any thoughts on building argumentation-specific software, i'd love to know. it's a pet project of mine, since slashdot is obviously -not- oriented towards thoughtful, succint debate. (more like a bunch of sports fans arguing about their favorite teams, than as people talking seriously about the things that made a difference in their lives, every day of the year... which i wish were what our politicians were like. that's not gonna happen. in any country i've been to.) so, how do you like the slashdot email-notification? (to quote an old thread -- "i've never tried [x], but the concept apalls me")
btw, i've lived in france, and travelled quite a bit in europe during my younger years (to those complaining i have no idea what non-US looks like and rant randomly)
in france, my parents are missionaries. american missionaries. and yes, they've received an extremely polite visit by the french authorities to check out what they preach. why? because they've had a problem with cults -- a big problem. suicides. lots of them. and they hate it. it hurts their own people, and they check to make sure that preachers (of any denomination) aren't going to eventually rape or murder those they take care of. you're free to believe anything you like -- but if they think you're dangerous, they'll keep an eye on you, to avoid problems later when the population asks why the french authorities didn't detect the problem earlier. as to evangelical christians in general -- the french government recognizes quite a few high-level religious groupings with a broad definition of their beliefs; ergo, if you can't be a part of those groups, they have reason to worry that you might be a radical, dangerous cult group. as to scientology, sure, believe as you like -- but also read www.xenu.net 's stuff. the point isn't to keep your from believing something -- it's to keep you from being sucked in and hurt by your own beliefs. just because your religion says that the sacrific of virgins is holy doesn't mean the government can't keep you from killing random virgins. you can keep believing it, but you bet they'll be watching to to make sure you don't act on your belief.
and guns? well... it's up to you, of course... but i don't trust my neighbors with guns any more than i trust myself. i mean, heck -- if you want to have the same brute power as the next dangerous person who might come knocking on your door, why don't you ask your government why it doesn't let you own and operate nuclear weapons? never know, you might need to defend yourself against those terrorists with weapons they got on the black market... which means the argument that gun control won't work because of the black market... is moot. but i would rather keep guns away from petty thugs who can't afford the black market prices. and let the military handle the rest.
perhaps you'd prefer they tell us how bad our society is without having lived for extended periods of time in both places? oh wait -- that's what WE do, complaining that we DO have the rights they tell us we don't have, without actually leaving our own country... hmmmm... makes you think? probably not.
i appreciate the motives behind 'maybe small businesses should even be exempt from patent claims altogether' but this would create a one-sided situation: small business invents something, big corps can't have it. fine. big corp invents something... and... they can't profit enough off of it to pay for the R&D, because all the very small businesses are just running very small versions of big corp's business -- staying small enough to continuously avoid lawsuits, but big enough to make a profit. and that... will kill the idea altogether. there are some things small businesses simply can't invent, for lack of funding for research. maybe they can invent late-1800's technology in the garage, but they can't, out of their shop on main street, test their manned-mission-to-jupiter system... i'll note though that perhaps my fears only matter in the middle-ground: the small shops -also- won't be able to duplicate the really expensive technologies -- both in R&D and in production costs... but if the production is cheap enough, then perhaps they can. without paying for R&D.
if it's in a slightly falling orbit, it'll pick up speed (accelerate) and, much like the way we sling-shot stuff around planets, wind up behind us, going faster... and i'd guess close enough for earth's field to slow it down again, pulling it back into a falling orbit... or somesuch. kinda like two intertwined strings, or if you've seen the videos of moons around jupiter... those are neat. the streaks cross paths back and forth...
not sure you could call it a full-time job: my girlfriend worked as a page at the state-level (not national, sadly) and can say that most of these people, besides getting a large hunk of the year off to go campaign for themselves, also barely read the bill ahead of time, wait for the bell, walk in, press a button, and leave. they've already decided ahead of time what they're voting for, they don't come "early" for the discussion.
now, let's try to contrast that with millions of americans. i can't. most of them would look at the stuff pending, decide they don't care, and not vote. our representatives can do that. if they do vote, they probably won't take the time to read it. still familiar. if they -do- care, however, they will probably read slashdot (no, not really) and vote the way they want to. and here's the big difference:
i can't vote for a single representative that is exactly what i want. and i have no chance in the world of getting one to vote the way i want him to on every issue. it can't be done: a few hundred people simply cannot represent the diversity of opinion in millions of people. but the people can. no, we're not ready for it yet. maybe we never will be -- but give people a chance, maybe, and see what they do with power in their own hands. it's easy for the industry to lobby a few hundred people -- heck, they can employ at least one person to lobby -each- congresscritter. but they can't do that for all americans -- they'd have to actually suck up to us, which they're not quite doing now (even though we assume a capitalist economy will tend to force the industry to comply with the demands of the populace.)
they don't have time to listen to all of us, they can't vote for all of us. they don't have the expertise in the fields related to the laws they vote on, and they get paid to do their job only a portion of the year... so the rest of the time, they can convince us they're doing stuff for us. i don't feel represented. do you?
which would be great, if it weren't for the cacheing of those images... and the fact that this page, right now, by itself (html) is 22k... ten times the size of the graphic. so by the time you're done converting to png... you've saved... hmmmm... a mega- per peta-byte? go you!
Isn't it only illegal under the DMCA if it relates, to, oh, the C in DMCA -- copyrights? The document may be copyrighted, and putting a license on it means that getting the document without agreeing to the license is circumvention in order to get to copyrighted material... but the patch itself, documented kernel problems... is, methinks, unlrelated to the DMCA. and if you read the register article, they pretty much think RedHat did this as a "joke" of sorts about the DMCA... not out of actual fear.
[quote]You aren't despairing about us, then. Greece was the birthplace of democracy, but democracy is unstable, and never lasts long anywhere. The US has always been a republic. Insofar as we can avoid democracy, we have a chance to keep our freedoms.[unquote]
could you elaborate on how you see a republic as being more stable and more secure (for its citizens) than a democracy? what inherent part of democracy makes it unstable?
Slashdot Mirror
and it's not like, say, in the fifties ... we used foreign scientists to, say, help build up our military again in the name of safety. except back then, we'd just -finished- a war with the germans, and i guess we felt safe taking their scientists to defeat the russians? and we seem just fine with buying japan-made cars and equipment ... even though we had to nuke them to end the war quickly ... but we're afraid of -random- foreign students, because we have a problem with a few isolated terrorist groups? talk about killing the patient to cure him ...
"Maybe their germans are better than our germans" (The Right Stuff)
isn't that where microsoft moves from the secure-audio-channel system to a secure-video-channel, with the hope you won't be able to extract the video back out of the video card itself ... and instead have to take a video camera to the screen, the way you'd take a tape recorder to your audio-out? ... do what some sites are doing now to prevent scripts from creating accounts -- put broken text on even more broken backgrounds with filters applied so only the human eye can really tell what's there ...) this would at least prevent plain-text/html renderings of the original text, and force you to distribute images ... which won't work any better with text-to-speech or other plugin/filter/layers you might want between you and your book. ...
yes, it's always accessible. but they'll hope to make it hard to copy -- for example, don't use functions that allow copy-pasting (just draw to a canvas, such that you have to do the screenshot thing) then modify the text so ocr software can't make it out (antialias a bit, change the colors randomly
it's actually much easier for them to render text readable to the human eye but not to software than for them to make music that can be even remotely enjoyed whilst not being recordable
Unfortunately, not everyone is so generous. Even if everyone were, in general, rather kind and loving like you, this wouldn't be a -guarantee- from the point of view of a government. And if the government sets as one of its basic requirements that it will not allow its citizens to die of starvation or lack of shelter (because they are citizens, and we care for pets better than that,) then it simply cannot allow its poorest members to be supported only by vaguely reliable charity. It simply can't, as a matter of protocol. And how can it pay to make sure that, under all circumstances, money will be available with which to support the needy? Taxes. Socialism. Because, quite frankly, humans aren't reliable.
... please try to die somewhere discreet. Cleaning up dead bodies under bridges is also volunteer work."
Would you like to be poor, on the streets, and for whatever reason unable to feed yourself (despite dearly wanting to work for it) and be forced to hear from the government: "Thank you for your request. However, we have outsourced all aid to the needy to the general population. It is recommended that you find a church, or charitable people, or some sort of community center, to find help. If that doesn't work, please feel free to go door to door begging. Just don't beg too much, or after hours, or we'll have to send the police out to quiet you. Thank you, and we hope it works out for you. And if you do die
you just reminded me of a gem which i left out of my previous post ... from that night (i took very careful notes on my cassiopeia, under the watchful eye of many a little old lady) ...
..." (pardon me if i misquote, this is from my notes, not a current translation.) Thus, death didn't exist before sin. Understand -- the man believes that although animals cam first, none of them ate. Not for several days. They just went without, unless they were non-carnivore. Thus ... either God gave them sharp pointy teeth and the instinct to kill prey out of spite (watch them mope around, not killing anything) or he planned that sin would happen, and would -then- let these poor creatures loose on each other. We couldn't decide which was funnier.
... so you can't tell what he/she is all about, or what good it may do to pray. The list goes on. But still -- agnostic, not atheist. And I went to a southern-baptist university, where the science class was more about proving that science doesn't have all the answers (that the bible scholars do) than about showing what answers it has found (fairly reliably.) [/offtopic]
"Because science self-corrects, scientists can't know everything about everything [...] thus, can they know anything about anything? But God knows all."
The guy also went to a lot of trouble to prove that dinosaurs existed five hundred years ago and were hunted by northern europeans to extinction. The T-Rex couldn't go any faster than three miles an hour, and would fall over if he tried to go any faster, killing himself. He also had teeth that would fall out if he tried to bring down his own prey, but worked fine for scavanging. Why all this? Well, partially because of Romans 5:12 "Therefore just as through one man sin entered the world, and death through sin..." and Corithians 15:21 "For since by man came death, by Man came life and the resurrection from dead
[offtopic] I'm myself agnostic, rather than atheist. I don't believe I have the means of telling if there is or is not a god of any sort. Not that it matters much -- even a simple theist (without selecting a faith) doesn't do much but believe in a god, somewhere, somehow. Pray? Without selecting a specific god, you don't have history, therefore you hardly have any 'properties' of the god
G'day!
i went to a talk given at a local church a few months ago on creationism. it was disturbing -- their motto was "teaching disciples to trust the bible's history for its accuracy, so that they will trust the bible's promise for their destiny" ... the basic problem was that these people so closely tied literal interpretation of biblical texts to their understanding of it as a whole that they could not deviate from it one bit, or the rest would fall apart too. you simply could not tell them that genesis might have been an abridged, simplified, or cliff's-notes version of what happened, or their entire faith would simply collapse. (this was demonstrated when he explained that evolution would imply the lack of a literal adam and eve, thus nullifying the whole story of sin.)
... all species? it opens up far more doors than it closes. and if you say god did plan it all ... well, you really didn't have a choice -- god meant for you to have acne and get beat up in school as a kid. yup. and your dog dying? god did that. on purpose.
even if you get away from literal interpretation, you still wind up with the calvinist problem -- so maybe god did create the universe, and we are an emergent property. either that means nothing, and god didn't really foresee us any more than he did the newly discovered jovian moon, or he did plan it -- and planning that far ahead means planning a lot of other things too. intelligent-design proponents stress how finely tuned the universe had to be. they do so to such a degree that -not- finding the universe predestined becomes difficult. saying that god didn't plan us means that the christ story becomes odd -- why would god care about just one planet? or all planets? or
and yes -- since everybody else was on vacation, -somebody- had to fill in for the trolls.
The scary thing about cults is that they have total control and are well funded. In many regards cults and islamic militant groups are not too dissimilar.
... resulting in surprise attacks from before-unheard-of groups. but what we rarely see is that even mainstream religions are, at a certain point, sect groups. consider the relationship between protestants and catholics? protestants were born of an ideological revolution against mainstream catholic control. right now, iranian students are protesting that their government sentenced a man to death for suggesting a new path for islam in his country -- that individuals be able to interpret their faith on their own. but even catholics, and all christians, are a sect branching off of the older jewish faith ... just as islam is. at each branch, people believed, deep down, they were doing what was right for themselves. and when they became extremists, they believed they were doing what was right for everybody else too. now consider the spin this puts on things like separation of church and state -- does a mainstream religion become oppressive the moment it gains a foot in the government of a country, regardless of whether its actions are good or bad? we already have laws that apply to all of us, even when we don't all agree. laws based on religious belief would be no different -- some of us believe one thing, some another ... it's hard to distinguish, in a democracy (of sorts) whether our laws are based on religious lobbying or individual beliefs -- because a single faith my have sway over a majority of the people in the country. do you ban an opinion or an experiment because of its source? thus, if a government gives money to somebody to experiment ... or in any way funds projects that -may- be related to an idea spawned, at some point, by a religious concept ... are we breaking separation of church and state? are we giving in to sect groups, funding them, aiding them to oppress the rest of the population? is it oppression, when we believe differently from those of a certain group, and force our government to uphold our ideals rather than theirs?
... different instance (child.) who is the government going to protect? and from what?
you're only hitting the tip of the iceberg. islamic militant groups, like most extreme religious groups, do not represent the core values of their main faith. sect groups of any sort are considered dangerous because, as small groups, their beliefs may vary widely and go unchecked
most of us believe the state has one rule -- that it shall govern how we interact with each other, but stay out of our personal business. (not the case in some states, by the way, that have rules about how you may go about romping in bed with even your wife...) in the case of cloning, what's the test? same class (DNA)
group discussion.
here's a question -- does windows have the same limitation linux does with the maximum number of file handles that can be open at once? i know it can be increased dynamically now, but most places, i would expect, haven't ...
how 'bout taking your idea, but doing it at least 8192 times all at once -- take up all the handles, and then use them excrutiatingly slowly. if one finishes (magically) start a new one.
if i own an object and drop it on the side of the road, and don't come back for months ... that doesn't change the fact that i own the object. if someone else comes along and asks if it's been abandoned -- the answer is probably yes. the question is then: if he/she picks it up and uses it, is that illegal? will anyone come after him/her for doing so?
even if i own the object and -could- complain, by having abandoned it i've stopped paying attention. thus, it's rather safe to use, even though it's someone's property. not by legality, but by practicality.
I'm trying to teach myself C without having to un-learn bad habits, so it helps to see the kind of things I should look out for.
... you're my worst nightmare? which bad habits do you have that you want to keep? were they learnt from another (dreaded) language like basic?
... works most of the time, has trouble catching proper nouns and acronyms unless 'dotted') ...
so
as to caps -- how 'bout just junking the whole idea. i've had enough problems at work with users not understanding that if we don't use just one case (uppercase) in the database, they'll go putting random case in there, especially lots of all-uppercase data. which really doesn't fit well on reports. and isn't correct. but they're -sure- we need to let them uppercase/lowercase to their heart's desire. (yes, we wrote algorithms specific to the english language to re-capitalize
must i remind you that you don't buy from pricewatch, but from any one of the many (usually) small webstores they represent and group? there are, in fact, some reputable stores listed there as well. in fact, the fact that pricewatch exists is a good thing -- it gives us a good idea of just how cheap you can get something. you don't have to buy it at that price (i usually don't, because i want better service) but it can tell you which places are completely ripping you off. and it's a great deal for the stores -- they can afford to sell you one hot item each at a completely ridiculous price and just hope you'll buy other stuff at a more reasonable price while you're at it. works for them, works for you ... compare this to ads in the newspaper where the latest dvd releases may not have a price marked, but instead have "everyday low price" instead ...
might mention that firebird has support under php, for those who care ... i use it in a windows/builder/c++ environment primarily, but we've built quite a few websites using it. VERY small memory footprint, compared to the competition. it is very complete, constantly improved, and the mailing lists are actually helpful =) (usually) ...
go firebird! (and interbase, i guess)
i really hate running into programmers who suck at database design -- they usually also suck at memory-structure design, algorithm design, etc. because they can't think the problems through, logically. cardinality is not a simple thing for a lot of people -- but it's not complicated either. and yet i've met some bright programmers and accountants (ugh) who just couldn't get it. foreign keys for no reason, text fields used to contain comma-separated lists of text-versions of the names of departments (numeric id's anyone? that already exist? in another table? agh!)
perhaps i'm an idiot -- but i've never gotten that to work. for the zaurus, it seems you need to setup an http proxy on the machine you're connecting through. for the casio i have, ... activesync by itself refuses. is it only on MS Windows CE 2002 (not 2000?) not that i really want to browse the net from a 320x240 screen on a casio attached to a USB cradle ... but ... well ... no, i really don't actually.
as we're reminded all the way through college by our profs. right before a paper is due ... don't believe anything and everything you find on the internet, just because it's there. in the same way, if you post comments about a company defrauding its customers without posting your background information on the claim, those reading it should know better than to believe you. that's always been the case -- yes, we're hurt when someone lies. but when they don't provide much info, shouldn't we also be responsible for looking into the issue? the main reason we can at all sue people for outrageous claims is that if done correctly, you can convince people and get a mob going in no time. witch hunts? burning at the stake? passionate messages may overrule any insight people have into your lies. but really ... is that not the listener's fault?
how 'bout
... very sensitive on that one.) if you've got any thoughts on building argumentation-specific software, i'd love to know. it's a pet project of mine, since slashdot is obviously -not- oriented towards thoughtful, succint debate. (more like a bunch of sports fans arguing about their favorite teams, than as people talking seriously about the things that made a difference in their lives, every day of the year ... which i wish were what our politicians were like. that's not gonna happen. in any country i've been to.) so, how do you like the slashdot email-notification? (to quote an old thread -- "i've never tried [x], but the concept apalls me")
8. Loire valley (really fun biking)
i'll try to seem less controversial in the future -- it's easy on slashdot to seem radical (especially radically anti-american
btw, i've lived in france, and travelled quite a bit in europe during my younger years (to those complaining i have no idea what non-US looks like and rant randomly)
... it's up to you, of course ... but i don't trust my neighbors with guns any more than i trust myself. i mean, heck -- if you want to have the same brute power as the next dangerous person who might come knocking on your door, why don't you ask your government why it doesn't let you own and operate nuclear weapons? never know, you might need to defend yourself against those terrorists with weapons they got on the black market ... which means the argument that gun control won't work because of the black market ... is moot. but i would rather keep guns away from petty thugs who can't afford the black market prices. and let the military handle the rest.
in france, my parents are missionaries. american missionaries. and yes, they've received an extremely polite visit by the french authorities to check out what they preach. why? because they've had a problem with cults -- a big problem. suicides. lots of them. and they hate it. it hurts their own people, and they check to make sure that preachers (of any denomination) aren't going to eventually rape or murder those they take care of. you're free to believe anything you like -- but if they think you're dangerous, they'll keep an eye on you, to avoid problems later when the population asks why the french authorities didn't detect the problem earlier. as to evangelical christians in general -- the french government recognizes quite a few high-level religious groupings with a broad definition of their beliefs; ergo, if you can't be a part of those groups, they have reason to worry that you might be a radical, dangerous cult group. as to scientology, sure, believe as you like -- but also read www.xenu.net 's stuff. the point isn't to keep your from believing something -- it's to keep you from being sucked in and hurt by your own beliefs. just because your religion says that the sacrific of virgins is holy doesn't mean the government can't keep you from killing random virgins. you can keep believing it, but you bet they'll be watching to to make sure you don't act on your belief.
and guns? well
perhaps you'd prefer they tell us how bad our society is without having lived for extended periods of time in both places? oh wait -- that's what WE do, complaining that we DO have the rights they tell us we don't have, without actually leaving our own country ... hmmmm ... makes you think? probably not.
i appreciate the motives behind 'maybe small businesses should even be exempt from patent claims altogether' but this would create a one-sided situation: small business invents something, big corps can't have it. fine. big corp invents something ... and ... they can't profit enough off of it to pay for the R&D, because all the very small businesses are just running very small versions of big corp's business -- staying small enough to continuously avoid lawsuits, but big enough to make a profit. and that ... will kill the idea altogether. there are some things small businesses simply can't invent, for lack of funding for research. maybe they can invent late-1800's technology in the garage, but they can't, out of their shop on main street, test their manned-mission-to-jupiter system ... i'll note though that perhaps my fears only matter in the middle-ground: the small shops -also- won't be able to duplicate the really expensive technologies -- both in R&D and in production costs ... but if the production is cheap enough, then perhaps they can. without paying for R&D.
yior french eez nut pardunned, silli ameriken! but ze ass claouns, zei must bee maid to pe!
tetris anyone?
if it's in a slightly falling orbit, it'll pick up speed (accelerate) and, much like the way we sling-shot stuff around planets, wind up behind us, going faster ... and i'd guess close enough for earth's field to slow it down again, pulling it back into a falling orbit ... or somesuch. kinda like two intertwined strings, or if you've seen the videos of moons around jupiter ... those are neat. the streaks cross paths back and forth ...
not sure you could call it a full-time job: my girlfriend worked as a page at the state-level (not national, sadly) and can say that most of these people, besides getting a large hunk of the year off to go campaign for themselves, also barely read the bill ahead of time, wait for the bell, walk in, press a button, and leave. they've already decided ahead of time what they're voting for, they don't come "early" for the discussion.
... so the rest of the time, they can convince us they're doing stuff for us. i don't feel represented. do you?
now, let's try to contrast that with millions of americans. i can't. most of them would look at the stuff pending, decide they don't care, and not vote. our representatives can do that. if they do vote, they probably won't take the time to read it. still familiar. if they -do- care, however, they will probably read slashdot (no, not really) and vote the way they want to. and here's the big difference:
i can't vote for a single representative that is exactly what i want. and i have no chance in the world of getting one to vote the way i want him to on every issue. it can't be done: a few hundred people simply cannot represent the diversity of opinion in millions of people. but the people can. no, we're not ready for it yet. maybe we never will be -- but give people a chance, maybe, and see what they do with power in their own hands. it's easy for the industry to lobby a few hundred people -- heck, they can employ at least one person to lobby -each- congresscritter. but they can't do that for all americans -- they'd have to actually suck up to us, which they're not quite doing now (even though we assume a capitalist economy will tend to force the industry to comply with the demands of the populace.)
they don't have time to listen to all of us, they can't vote for all of us. they don't have the expertise in the fields related to the laws they vote on, and they get paid to do their job only a portion of the year
which would be great, if it weren't for the cacheing of those images ... and the fact that this page, right now, by itself (html) is 22k ... ten times the size of the graphic. so by the time you're done converting to png ... you've saved ... hmmmm ... a mega- per peta-byte? go you!
Isn't it only illegal under the DMCA if it relates, to, oh, the C in DMCA -- copyrights? The document may be copyrighted, and putting a license on it means that getting the document without agreeing to the license is circumvention in order to get to copyrighted material ... but the patch itself, documented kernel problems ... is, methinks, unlrelated to the DMCA. and if you read the register article, they pretty much think RedHat did this as a "joke" of sorts about the DMCA ... not out of actual fear.
[quote]You aren't despairing about us, then. Greece was the birthplace of democracy, but democracy is unstable, and never lasts long anywhere. The US has always been a republic. Insofar as we can avoid democracy, we have a chance to keep our freedoms.[unquote]
could you elaborate on how you see a republic as being more stable and more secure (for its citizens) than a democracy? what inherent part of democracy makes it unstable?