Cat evolution is considered a minefield because of the large number of apparently similar types that are unlikely to be directly related.
I seem to remember that sabretooths have appeared at least twice, but of course it's unlikely to be because of a simple genetic switch such as that controlling coat colour.
Ah yes, thanks for the reminder. How unfortunate for their credibility that the Mono proponents (on the "gomono" site) have spent the last 3 years assuring everyone that it would be compatible with Dotnet.
I suppose now there's some traction the initial promises can be dispensed with?
Aha ok, well here's one item about it that implies that the change in UK journalism etc. is fairly recent so maybe we were mostly taught the old way as you say.
I'm not sure what the relevance of the above is to your original statement that a share of TV sales revenue goes to broadcasters. Annual licenses are levied by the state on behalf of the broadcasters, not by the TV vendor.
It's a rule of American English. As I think noted in the US forward to "Eats, Shoots and Leaves", British English converged on the scheme you like ("logical quoting") some time ago.
I think your monetarist fixation is showing. You might try broadening your reading a little, or taking a look at ODSL or the BBC for some ideas on how FOSS content is developed now.
Sure. But given how you want to participate in the market you're going to be in a minority, and if it turned out that it's a real small minority then I guess there's a risk it could be unfair to you.
I'm in a similar boat here in the UK as I'm one of the 1% who do not have a TV. Currently this means I don't have to pay $180 p.a. for a license, but I use the BBC web site and radio services, and might use view program content online when they make it available, so I guess I wouldn't gripe too much about paying the license if they changed the rules and decoupled it from physical TVs.
The alternate evil is that the community is policed to ensure that only those who have paid get to share, but then we're back to DRM again.
So the least worst option is for a tax, as long as it is small (relative to average total spent on content), fair (discount for little old ladies) and democratic (likely to have stuff you want as well as what other people want). An official MS tax (as opposed to the unofficial one) would fail at least one of those criteria.
More specifically still, I think you'll find it smacks of the Stalin's pre-war purges organised by the 22nd party congress as part of the 3rd Five Year Plan.
We have organized a similar police state in the UK to help fund the BBC.
I vaguely remember reading as a kid that the lunar rover worked this way. Seemed ok in moon gravity at least.
(And perhaps because of the lateness of the hour, this triggers a much more recent memory of some dudes riding around central London perched on a kind of open chassis living room with old-style sofa, standard lamp, rug, TV etc. Wonder if they made the news before the subject of road-worthiness was brought to their attention?)
I suppose so - literally checking ID is reasonable enough.
The problem is the information they choose to associate with the ID. And of course I don't just mean anything else stored on the card - any real info about you is stored on a central system and just keyed off your card.
But then these systems are already around, so perhaps fussing about the key used to access them is really a distraction?
Slashdot Mirror
But your other post referred to installation problems, not porting problems.
"too little too late"
I'd say this tag better fits Mono. Mono will always be behind Dotnet by definition, and Java applications outstrip Mono by approximately 1000 to 1.
Cat evolution is considered a minefield because of the large number of apparently similar types that are unlikely to be directly related.
I seem to remember that sabretooths have appeared at least twice, but of course it's unlikely to be because of a simple genetic switch such as that controlling coat colour.
Vodafone have moved all the J2EE-based middleware to JBoss
This is not true.
.NET is designed to work on any and all operating systems. They simply need a unique CLR. and the Win32 API
Freesat and Freesat from Sky are not the same thing cf. Freesat
Ah yes, thanks for the reminder. How unfortunate for their credibility that the Mono proponents (on the "gomono" site) have spent the last 3 years assuring everyone that it would be compatible with Dotnet.
I suppose now there's some traction the initial promises can be dispensed with?
Personally I find the idea of "content" flamebait.
Well paying £7.50 to see WotW felt like being mugged - utter garbage from beginning to end.
How about a graph of Spielberg movie quality / t?
Aha ok, well here's one item about it that implies that the change in UK journalism etc. is fairly recent so maybe we were mostly taught the old way as you say.
I'm not sure what the relevance of the above is to your original statement that a share of TV sales revenue goes to broadcasters. Annual licenses are levied by the state on behalf of the broadcasters, not by the TV vendor.
It's a rule of American English. As I think noted in the US forward to "Eats, Shoots and Leaves", British English converged on the scheme you like ("logical quoting") some time ago.
Nope, not true for any EC country (would count as trade restriction).
It's not a bug it's a technology.
I think your monetarist fixation is showing. You might try broadening your reading a little, or taking a look at ODSL or the BBC for some ideas on how FOSS content is developed now.
Sure. But given how you want to participate in the market you're going to be in a minority, and if it turned out that it's a real small minority then I guess there's a risk it could be unfair to you.
I'm in a similar boat here in the UK as I'm one of the 1% who do not have a TV. Currently this means I don't have to pay $180 p.a. for a license, but I use the BBC web site and radio services, and might use view program content online when they make it available, so I guess I wouldn't gripe too much about paying the license if they changed the rules and decoupled it from physical TVs.
The alternate evil is that the community is policed to ensure that only those who have paid get to share, but then we're back to DRM again.
So the least worst option is for a tax, as long as it is small (relative to average total spent on content), fair (discount for little old ladies) and democratic (likely to have stuff you want as well as what other people want). An official MS tax (as opposed to the unofficial one) would fail at least one of those criteria.
Buying physical media is the old "commodity" model.
Nothing wrong with that, but this discussion is about funding content that is not commoditized.
Is FOSS stagnating now then?
Or are you saying that if developers get it into their heads that they might be rewarded for their FOSS efforts this will act as a deterrent?
Which, statistically, you can be assumed to do, right?
More specifically still, I think you'll find it smacks of the Stalin's pre-war purges organised by the 22nd party congress as part of the 3rd Five Year Plan.
We have organized a similar police state in the UK to help fund the BBC.
--
Gentleman, scholar, acrobat.
Yes, the particular elision being made here is between a system that you can trust and one that they can trust.
The former does not require the latter but we can safely assume it will never appear that way.
I vaguely remember reading as a kid that the lunar rover worked this way. Seemed ok in moon gravity at least.
(And perhaps because of the lateness of the hour, this triggers a much more recent memory of some dudes riding around central London perched on a kind of open chassis living room with old-style sofa, standard lamp, rug, TV etc. Wonder if they made the news before the subject of road-worthiness was brought to their attention?)
A proper engineered solution to this problem was developed some time ago: a VM.
There are 1000s of Java projects on SourceForge that will never have this problem.
I suppose so - literally checking ID is reasonable enough.
The problem is the information they choose to associate with the ID. And of course I don't just mean anything else stored on the card - any real info about you is stored on a central system and just keyed off your card.
But then these systems are already around, so perhaps fussing about the key used to access them is really a distraction?
IBM?
BEA?