Besides, if porn websites tend to enjoy a greater commercial benefit from the internet, what's wrong with them paying a bigger price?
Well perhaps because as a general principle, it's
immoral to charge different amount for different
fields of endeavor. A domain should cost the same,
regardless of the TLD in which it resides. Anything
else is just a money grab.
As an aside, there are already too many TLDs, and
I despair at all those clamouring for more.
However, in this case,.xxx is perhaps the only
proposed new TLD that's actually worth implementing.
Re:Apple should start...
on
Safari vs. KHTML
·
· Score: 0, Flamebait
KHTML uses CVS, and Apple internally uses Perforce. [...] Apple, offer to buy licenses of your source control software for the KHTML core.
Since no one in their right mind would voluntarily
use Perforce, that may not actually help...
I too already have a small SSH device -- a Sharp Zaurus SL-C860. Much as I love OpenBSD, I'll be
sticking with Linux on my Zaurus. I use it with a
bluetooth mobile phone to remotely ssh into our
production servers when I'm on call and away from
a fixed net connection. Unlike using PuTTY directly on the
phone, the Zaurus has a full qwerty keyboard, which
actually makes it usable.
If anybody tells you that a typeface on a document you have created is GPLd, then that has absolutely no legal weight. Can't copyright font typefaces, fullstop.
Complete and utter rubbish. The font FAQ to which you linked even agrees:
scalable fonts are, in the opinion of the Copyright Office, computer programs, and as such are copyrightable
You can't copyright
the shape of the typeface, but you can copyright the
electronic typeface file,
since it (at least in the
case of PostScript fonts, and probably for TrueType
too) is a program. Adobe deliberately designed
their font format to be a PostScript program
specifically so
that you could copyright them.
The only relevant question is whether a document
that uses a font program is derived from it or
merely aggregated with it. Common sense
interpretation would seem to imply the latter.
But common sense and the law disagree on far
too many occasions to assume that'll hold true
in front of a judge...
Try again. The Adventure shell compiles to advsh, not ash. ASH is, and always will be, the Almquist shell.
Try again. Maybe it does now (probably to avoid
confusion with the Almquist shell), but trust me,
when I first encountered it nearly two decades ago,
it was installed as "ash". The Almquist shell
wasn't even conceived then...
Who needs an infinite loop? Just running running
any java program should be enough to consume all of your CPU cycles and bring the system to its knees...
Even if they're successful, AFP will be the losers here.
Why
can't people see that far from stealing their customers,
Google drives visitors to their sites? By removing themselves
from Google, all AFP will do is reduce their number of visitors,
and hence the overall value of their site. This is particularly
strange as AFP sells subscription based premium content, which
isn't available to the masses anyway. Thus the only parts of
the site that Google will be able to index are the loss leaders
that they use to try and entice people to subscribe. As a
business, I'd have thought you'd want that content to
be made available to a wider audience at no extra cost to you...
The point of this article is that you no longer need to use the "we own your soul" closed source BK client just to download the kernel
Of course, you never did anyway. There have been
numerous ways to get at the up to date kernel
source for a long time without requiring bitkeeper
(e.g., bk2cvs).
Berkley DB (XML) is great for some applications, but it lacks high availability (remote replication, clustering, etc).
Have you looked at the Berkeley DB XML High Availability product? It definitely supports
multi node clusters. Remote replication should be
fairly trivial to achieve, too (although I haven't
personally tried it).
I may not use the mail, news or chat parts of
the suite, but the browser rocks. Firefox has
done wonders for popularizing the Gecko rendering
engine, but
Mozilla is still the better browser. Let's hope
Firefox can come up to speed soon.
I've been looking for a thumb-wheeled mouse for a while now, so this looks interesting.
So have I. Mostly because I use the middle button.
A lot. So I detest wheel mice that have a half
sized middle button with a wheel on it. Sadly, this
new mouse screws up a good idea by only having two
normal buttons. Sigh. I have a feeling that when
the time comes that apps start requiring the use of
a wheel, I'm going to have to mutilate my existing
Logitech Pilot mice to add a thumb wheel, just so
I can get something usable...
the biggest strength of x, the separation of display and communication layers, is also its bigges weakness.
Explain where the weakness lies. X is more than
fast enough locally. Yes, various people have
claimed the extra context switches slow things
down. But I've yet to see a single benchmark to
back up their claims. And even if the benchmarks
show X to be slower than $OTHER_DISPLAY_SYSTEM,
does it matter? Have you ever seen an application
that runs too slowly (i.e. noticable by an
end user, not a microbenchmark)
due to X's communication overhead? I haven't.
I've never met anyone else that has, either.
Devolution? Sure, why not? I mean it's not as if we
want you. Most of us would be quite happy to wipe
out everything north of Watford anyway. It's not as
if there's anythign of value up there (until you reach the Scottish border, anyway):-)
The USA has 4.78 times the population, but 37.92
times the land area. Thus the UK has nearly 8 times
the population density, which makes the notion of
just jumping in a car and being somewhere in a few
hours quite
amusing. It's so crowded here, it takes ages to
get anywhere, particularly in the south east. It
takes me around 40 minutes just
to get to my parents
house (which is 8 miles away), simply due to
weight of traffic.
I realise that most Americans are geographically challenged and that this is a smaller mistake than usual (When I was at University in Swansea, it was not infrequent for americans to say "Oh, you're in Wales... that's in London isn't it?").
Actually, it's a bigger mistake than usual. London to Cardiff is only 152 miles. Even if you aim for the far side of Wales, London to Aberystwyth is 236 miles. Compare that with London to Sellafield at
311 miles...
Having to wait a couple of seconds everytime you make a change sucks.
Just having a compiler installed on your public facing
production machine is a huge faux pas in the first
place. Yes, it's possible to procompile everything
before you deploy it, but it's a pain in the ass...
No, I'd say as I read last night, there were some that we probably can never talk about publicly because... (both laugh) which was fine. But I have their names and emails myself so I can answer them.
Does the very fact that you can't talk publicly about some of this stuff not strike you as odd?
Are Microsoft so unsure of their stance on
particular subjects that they can't discuss it
in a public forum?
Anyway, since you're apparently going to be reading this, can you answer my question?
I feel compelled to mention Gnome's Bitstream Vera fonts.
Sadly for me, they fall into the "so close, and yet
so far" category. Vera Serif[1] is probably the most
readable font I've ever seen on a screen. It
is a thing of beauty. But the
lack of italics makes it lack viability for
common uses. I really
hope this will be addressed soon.
[1] No, I don't understand the obsession with using
sans-serif fonts on web pages. It hinders
readability. The serifs are there for a reason,
to help guide the eye, and assist the brain to
pattern match. They didn't work on low resolution
screens, but on today's displays, using sans-serif
fonts just doesn't make sense for prose.
I see nothing particularly unprofessional about the daemon.
Indeed. As if proof were needed, having a
fat penguin as a logo doesn't seem to
have done Linux any harm. I fail to see how
that could be more professional than a daemon...
How is using a proprietary.doc better than using.pdf or any other open standard and how is Microsoft going to handle this in the future? Any plans on opening it completely?
Actually, the question is misleading. The.doc
file format is documented on MSDN[1], and is just
as open as PDF. The two also serve different needs.
PDF is effectively a page description language,
albeit one with some nice interactivity features
like forms and even animations (although few
people use them). The.doc format is intented
for editable documents, and stores various metadata along with the content. PDF is not and
doesn't.
But it does lead nicely to another file
format related question.
Last week,
Bill Gates claimed:
But the solution that has proven consistently effective - and the one that yields the greatest success for developers today - is a strong commitment to interoperability. That means letting different kinds of applications and systems do what they do best, while agreeing on a common "contract" for how disparate systems can communicate to exchange data with one another.
Common file formats are the contract by which
office applications can exchange data with each
other. Given Bill's commitment to interoperability,
when can we expect the Visio file format to be
documented so that other diagram editors such
as Dia of Kivio can interoperate with Visio,
as Bill desires?
Similarly, the Exchange wire protocol is the
contract by which mail clients communicate and
exchange data with the MS Exchange mail server.
I take it that we can look forward to documentation
for that, too, so that the myriad email clients
in use today can talk to an Exchange server?
Another example would be the W3C standards, the
contract by which a web developer sends markup
information to an end user for viewing in a
browser. The rest of the world is happily using
CSS to provide rich presentation of information
to end users. Yet as developers, we are forced
to break that contract because Microsoft's IE
browser doesn't honour the contract, and our web
sites don't display in the intended manner. Will
MS commit to bringing IE up to scratch so that it
interoperates with the rest of the world?
Will MS start making versions of Word that use
standard UTF-8 character encoding, rather than
a Microsoft specific one that produces
output that doesn't interoperate with
non-Microsoft platforms (and even, as we found
out this week, with newer versions of IE, which
correctly ignore the MS character set!)
Or was he merely referring to making Microsoft
applications interoperable with each other, a
move which reduces customer choice, and prevents
them from picking the best solution available
for the task because it may not interoperate
correctly with existing Microsoft products?
[1] At least, it was. I don't know if that
documentation has been kept up to date with the
latest versions of.doc
Slashdot Mirror
Well perhaps because as a general principle, it's immoral to charge different amount for different fields of endeavor. A domain should cost the same, regardless of the TLD in which it resides. Anything else is just a money grab.
As an aside, there are already too many TLDs, and I despair at all those clamouring for more. However, in this case, .xxx is perhaps the only
proposed new TLD that's actually worth implementing.
Since no one in their right mind would voluntarily use Perforce, that may not actually help...
I too already have a small SSH device -- a Sharp Zaurus SL-C860. Much as I love OpenBSD, I'll be sticking with Linux on my Zaurus. I use it with a bluetooth mobile phone to remotely ssh into our production servers when I'm on call and away from a fixed net connection. Unlike using PuTTY directly on the phone, the Zaurus has a full qwerty keyboard, which actually makes it usable.
Sounds like an easy choice. Fyodor knows his subject...
Complete and utter rubbish. The font FAQ to which you linked even agrees:
You can't copyright the shape of the typeface, but you can copyright the electronic typeface file, since it (at least in the case of PostScript fonts, and probably for TrueType too) is a program. Adobe deliberately designed their font format to be a PostScript program specifically so that you could copyright them.
The only relevant question is whether a document that uses a font program is derived from it or merely aggregated with it. Common sense interpretation would seem to imply the latter. But common sense and the law disagree on far too many occasions to assume that'll hold true in front of a judge...
xpdf works fine for me, printing to a Lexmark Optra E312. ghostscript blacks out the first character of many of the labels, but xpdf works fine.
Try again. Maybe it does now (probably to avoid confusion with the Almquist shell), but trust me, when I first encountered it nearly two decades ago, it was installed as "ash". The Almquist shell wasn't even conceived then...
No, ash is both. The adventure shell predates the almquist shell by many years. They both happen to use an executable named ash, though.
Who needs an infinite loop? Just running running any java program should be enough to consume all of your CPU cycles and bring the system to its knees...
Even if they're successful, AFP will be the losers here. Why can't people see that far from stealing their customers, Google drives visitors to their sites? By removing themselves from Google, all AFP will do is reduce their number of visitors, and hence the overall value of their site. This is particularly strange as AFP sells subscription based premium content, which isn't available to the masses anyway. Thus the only parts of the site that Google will be able to index are the loss leaders that they use to try and entice people to subscribe. As a business, I'd have thought you'd want that content to be made available to a wider audience at no extra cost to you...
Of course, you never did anyway. There have been numerous ways to get at the up to date kernel source for a long time without requiring bitkeeper (e.g., bk2cvs).
Have you looked at the Berkeley DB XML High Availability product? It definitely supports multi node clusters. Remote replication should be fairly trivial to achieve, too (although I haven't personally tried it).
I may not use the mail, news or chat parts of the suite, but the browser rocks. Firefox has done wonders for popularizing the Gecko rendering engine, but Mozilla is still the better browser. Let's hope Firefox can come up to speed soon.
I wish! Here in the UK, I'd expect to pay the equivalent of around US$24 for a normal length (~10-12 track) album.
So have I. Mostly because I use the middle button. A lot. So I detest wheel mice that have a half sized middle button with a wheel on it. Sadly, this new mouse screws up a good idea by only having two normal buttons. Sigh. I have a feeling that when the time comes that apps start requiring the use of a wheel, I'm going to have to mutilate my existing Logitech Pilot mice to add a thumb wheel, just so I can get something usable...
Explain where the weakness lies. X is more than fast enough locally. Yes, various people have claimed the extra context switches slow things down. But I've yet to see a single benchmark to back up their claims. And even if the benchmarks show X to be slower than $OTHER_DISPLAY_SYSTEM, does it matter? Have you ever seen an application that runs too slowly (i.e. noticable by an end user, not a microbenchmark) due to X's communication overhead? I haven't. I've never met anyone else that has, either.
Devolution? Sure, why not? I mean it's not as if we want you. Most of us would be quite happy to wipe out everything north of Watford anyway. It's not as if there's anythign of value up there (until you reach the Scottish border, anyway) :-)
The USA has 4.78 times the population, but 37.92 times the land area. Thus the UK has nearly 8 times the population density, which makes the notion of just jumping in a car and being somewhere in a few hours quite amusing. It's so crowded here, it takes ages to get anywhere, particularly in the south east. It takes me around 40 minutes just to get to my parents house (which is 8 miles away), simply due to weight of traffic.
Actually, it's a bigger mistake than usual. London to Cardiff is only 152 miles. Even if you aim for the far side of Wales, London to Aberystwyth is 236 miles. Compare that with London to Sellafield at 311 miles...
Via ssh. But if you think we expose anything other than ports 80 and 443 on the public interface, you're nuts...
Just having a compiler installed on your public facing production machine is a huge faux pas in the first place. Yes, it's possible to procompile everything before you deploy it, but it's a pain in the ass...
Does the very fact that you can't talk publicly about some of this stuff not strike you as odd? Are Microsoft so unsure of their stance on particular subjects that they can't discuss it in a public forum?
Anyway, since you're apparently going to be reading this, can you answer my question?
Sadly for me, they fall into the "so close, and yet so far" category. Vera Serif[1] is probably the most readable font I've ever seen on a screen. It is a thing of beauty. But the lack of italics makes it lack viability for common uses. I really hope this will be addressed soon.
[1] No, I don't understand the obsession with using sans-serif fonts on web pages. It hinders readability. The serifs are there for a reason, to help guide the eye, and assist the brain to pattern match. They didn't work on low resolution screens, but on today's displays, using sans-serif fonts just doesn't make sense for prose.
Indeed. As if proof were needed, having a fat penguin as a logo doesn't seem to have done Linux any harm. I fail to see how that could be more professional than a daemon...
Actually, the question is misleading. The .doc
file format is documented on MSDN[1], and is just
as open as PDF. The two also serve different needs.
PDF is effectively a page description language,
albeit one with some nice interactivity features
like forms and even animations (although few
people use them). The .doc format is intented
for editable documents, and stores various metadata along with the content. PDF is not and
doesn't.
But it does lead nicely to another file format related question. Last week, Bill Gates claimed:
Common file formats are the contract by which office applications can exchange data with each other. Given Bill's commitment to interoperability, when can we expect the Visio file format to be documented so that other diagram editors such as Dia of Kivio can interoperate with Visio, as Bill desires?
Similarly, the Exchange wire protocol is the contract by which mail clients communicate and exchange data with the MS Exchange mail server. I take it that we can look forward to documentation for that, too, so that the myriad email clients in use today can talk to an Exchange server?
Another example would be the W3C standards, the contract by which a web developer sends markup information to an end user for viewing in a browser. The rest of the world is happily using CSS to provide rich presentation of information to end users. Yet as developers, we are forced to break that contract because Microsoft's IE browser doesn't honour the contract, and our web sites don't display in the intended manner. Will MS commit to bringing IE up to scratch so that it interoperates with the rest of the world?
Will MS start making versions of Word that use standard UTF-8 character encoding, rather than a Microsoft specific one that produces output that doesn't interoperate with non-Microsoft platforms (and even, as we found out this week, with newer versions of IE, which correctly ignore the MS character set!)
Or was he merely referring to making Microsoft applications interoperable with each other, a move which reduces customer choice, and prevents them from picking the best solution available for the task because it may not interoperate correctly with existing Microsoft products?
[1] At least, it was. I don't know if that documentation has been kept up to date with the latest versions of .doc