However, you should realize that it's nothing about our "pleasure and convenience" involved with the food industry involved with livestock.
Look at the teeth in your mouth. If you were purely an herbivore, you wouldn't have what we call the eye-teeth in your mouth- you'd have a mouth more resembling a horse's or a cows. Seriously. You should note, that your body is an omnivore's meaning that it doesn't give a flip about your sensibilities and feelings and is designed to eat meat as well as vegetative matter- in combination. There are several crucial fatty acids you will have some major difficulty obtaining solely from plants. This SHOULD be a hint to anyone that insists that we don't have to eat animals. There's some other crucial amino acids and sugars you need that simply will not come from eating nothing but meat. That SHOULD be a hint to anyone holding the polar opposite of your position.
Eating nothing but plants is actually something of an unnatural act for humans- as is eating solely meat.
So, it's not "pleasure and convenience" that it's done.
Because you can do touch displays and similar things VASTLY easier with the move than staying with the stock xorg stuff. The upshot is that they've already demonstrated compatibility in the large with the current ecosystem and if they come up with comparable answers while they're moving things to the better solution, so much the better, really.
I'd have a problem if you couldn't do that or have NX be busted completely- neither are acceptable and shouldn't be considered so unless you've got comparable answers in hand. Unless you can do something identical with Wayland, you're going to have fewer takers than they think on this.
Ahh... But they have to serve him WITHIN the Court's jurisdiction, else it's not proper service and carries no force of law. It's not QUITE as simple as you're making it out to be. If they don't serve him within the confines of his jurisdiction and he's off on legit company business (which he is, actually) they can't serve him and when the clock on their ability to serve the subpoena runs out they've got to try for it again- and I'll bet good money they don't have the time to do it after the clock runs out on them this go-round.
And they can't serve him while out of the court's jurisdiction. Until he agrees to be party to the case via the subpoena, he is only subject to it while he's physically there in it's jurisdiction. Answer, don't be there but don't be seen to doing it deliberately by the court in doing it. There's a time limit on this and it's probably going to expire on Oracle before he's back to the corp offices in Texas.:-D
Indeed. Shrewd move as there's a time limit on trying to serve him as well. The PR people make it sound like he's deliberately doing it (contempt of court sanction time if so...) but it's not really that way- or can be phrased so it isn't so. Once the time limit's up, they have to re-file; but they may be out of time in the court case against SAP by that point.
The Judge was wrong in doing so if they did that. Fails due process several ways.
Many lawyers would be able to get at least a continuance if it was an ongoing trial and a reversal/dismissal on a default judgment if they tried a bit as the party wasn't properly served- and couldn't be so with what was done.
Service constitutes varying things- but that's not one of them. If you're in a divorce, they've given an allowance for, once you've tried to serve them physically, to serve the other party by public announcement, but it requires you proving that your attempt to serve them by process server produced no results over several months' time. And that's really only for a divorce. You HAVE to physically serve someone for things like this- or it doesn't count.
Now, I'd be a bit cheesed by HP's PR people making the statement they have- willfully avoiding a process server is a contempt of court type of thing. I'd have kept mum on it and just merely not disclosed it as they're under no obligation to hand them his schedule, etc.
There's also a requirement to have a PRODUCT that could be put into the Schedule to begin with. I'm pretty sure they've got a DUNS number at the least (Most major corps typically have one.) and the rest is easy.
Don't seize on what the GSA did for a reason for refusal here. I'm strongly suspecting that they were finding out what they needed to do to possibly get the business before they went and did the rest- because they'd have had to.
No, there's an issue there. It's called an EXPLICITLY CLOSED contract when they're obligated by law to provide OPEN bids for things. Claims of "enhanced security" and "integrated mail, etc." is bunk. There's a handful of actual solutions that meet all those criteria, actually, and Google was one of the prospective providers. I don't know where the lawsuit will go, but there IS a serious problem with the DOI deal there.
Got it in one. The explicit requiring of Microsoft's products pretty much goes beyond the typical stretching of the rules and stacking of the deck- in a way, I'm pretty sure of, they're not supposed to do in the first place.
Good luck with that. The systems out there barely handle things like standard English handwriting. The Chinese systems more or less allow them to enter in the glyphs, but they're still more-or-less doing graphics and not actual symbol entry except for a small subset of the glyph set.
Heh... Then they shouldn't be advertising it as the great big thing on their networks then. (And I concur on your assessment on things there...) I'm thinking they should re-think their signalling system thoughts. The MAIN cause of these problems is that they're thinking of everything in terms of the old voice switching system- seriously. Each of these signalling systems they're currently using are compensations for insisting upon expanding the behavior of SS7 to the next thing.
It's because those "great architects" and "great developers" are inured in the telecom industry insanity. (And it's that...) All these protocols are based on the premise that absolutely everything must be controlled by them- and that it be some variation on the theme of SS7. Seriously.
Actually, if it was going to go berserk in the example you gave, it'd have already done so. All those Droid, DroidX, Droid Incredible, and Droid2's would have done it just as readily as the iPhones would have.
Actually, Riddick is considered an anti-hero because he's a brutal killer, first and foremost- as much in tune with the animal side as his "human" side and uses both with a vengeance with little to no remorse in what he does. (Which is the source of the "scary" people point out periodically about him...)
To be sure, he pretty much butchers only the wicked (and more those that're outright BEGGING through their actions to get what he dishes out...), based on the stories we've seen in the movies and videogames, but he's got no qualms in letting anyone die or killing someone to be the one surviving a situation- also based on the stories we've been shown. Clearly amoral and definitely anti-hero material.
Actually, the intent is what you stated. The reality is more akin to what GP poster stated.
In truth, what was done wasn't reform. It wasn't and can't fix the system as it currently is. And, sadly, it makes things WORSE, not better.
If you believe that what you're saying is true, state it as opinion or back it up with facts. I'll be prepared to back up my remarks with facts, are you?
Actually, in this case, it might be deemed as such because of the end results from all the R&D that would ensue. If it's not violating the trade regulations for what we're restricting to China, it could be made as a case that it IS trade.
Now, whether or not Obama could catch the verbiage in a law and veto it, however, is another discussion altogether. We had them try to wedge amnesty for certain classes of illegal aliens into an appropriations bill for the DoD. Talk about utterly irrelevant and shameful to boot. What's to keep Congress from pushing in the law in question that might actually violate our treaties this way?
Which only applies to commerce crossing state lines, per the Constitution.
Some of the things the Federal government does in the name of the "Commerce Clause" aren't really what the framers had in mind. A thorough reading of things, like legislation, jurisprudence, etc. from the era indicate that this use of the "Commerce Clause" is a recent thing, allowed by one precedent that was debatable to begin with- something more like legislating from the bench.
The current interpretation of it where it also includes "significantly impacting" behaviors is not in the verbiage and isn't really anything other than someone in the Supreme Court legislating from the bench
It's already outdated? I don't see any mobile gaming vendor fielding an OMAP3 device yet. Hell Sony and Nintendo have yet to even try to offer the same class of tech right at the moment.
No, but each and every one of the other Socialist countries HAVE done this very thing or are dismantling their operations because they can't continue.
Socialism works fine so long as you can find people to take money from or largely each and every citizen actually is on the same page and actually working towards the same goal. Sweden and Norway are probably almost the only places on the Earth that you see everyone largely being on the same page and the execution of the Socialist system is the "right" one for the people. It is WRONG to go and point to Sweden and Norway and say that they can do it, so everyone else can. That's not at all accurate. Environmental conditions, population, general cultural bents, etc. will dictate whether or not you can even make Socialism work for extended periods of time. With all the freeloaders we have in this country, coupled with the WAY we've implemented Socialist functions of the government, there is no way to implement it. In the end, you need harsh controls on what goes down in the Socialist system- and things aren't as efficient even in Sweden or Norway (How quickly do you get access to medical care? I'd posit that it was about like the Canadian story, which means hours waits in many cases unless you're in a triage situation from a trauma that requires an ER visit.).
In the end, just pointing to those two countries is insufficient for argumentation purposes. They're not facts unto themselves and will not end an argument with someone prepared to discuss it rationally with you or anyone else.
WinMo and it's predecessors haven't been overly successful when you get to brass tacks. There's been relatively limited uptake of the devices that the stuff ran on. Part of it is that they tried to make it as close to the Windows experience as possible so it was "familiar" to people. It was familiar alright. It was also clumsy on most devices in the space. PalmOS fared better for longer because it was easier to use on mobile devices (Palm died less because it was unsuitable and more because it couldn't transition to a more capable OS version that allowed things like what iOS and Android now provide, even though they tried to do it for years...). BlackBerry's OS would be another instance of this.
I'm sure they're going to try to do it with WinMo. It's their only remotely credible play in this space. Sadly, it's a bit behind the times and the only way they hope to do anything really credible with it is if they succeed in scaring people with lawsuits like the one they've got with Moto right now. And that may be backfiring on them. People don't like seeing that sort of activity- especially with the party suing with such weak patents and a case that looks more like they're trying to mug them into coming back to the negotiation table to do licensing of some sort.
Heh... They're still clumsy to use. Windows is designed around a desktop machine paradigm, which doesn't work so hot in a handheld space and probably never will.
There was PenPoint and Newton in that space at that point in time (and before them...)- and Microsoft's answer was expensive (even in comparison to the other two...) and was CLUMSY to use. It was done by bolting on a few extra functionalities that understood a digitizer pad on top of Windows 3.11 at the time and then later on Win95 and XP.
Slashdot Mirror
Heh... That's because you're not thinking ahead... >;-D
I commend you on your choice to be a Vegan.
However, you should realize that it's nothing about our "pleasure and convenience" involved with the food industry involved with livestock.
Look at the teeth in your mouth. If you were purely an herbivore, you wouldn't have what we call the eye-teeth in your mouth- you'd have a mouth more resembling a horse's or a cows. Seriously.
You should note, that your body is an omnivore's meaning that it doesn't give a flip about your sensibilities and feelings and is designed to eat meat as well as vegetative matter- in combination.
There are several crucial fatty acids you will have some major difficulty obtaining solely from plants. This SHOULD be a hint to anyone that insists that we don't have to eat animals. There's
some other crucial amino acids and sugars you need that simply will not come from eating nothing but meat. That SHOULD be a hint to anyone holding the polar opposite of your position.
Eating nothing but plants is actually something of an unnatural act for humans- as is eating solely meat.
So, it's not "pleasure and convenience" that it's done.
Because you can do touch displays and similar things VASTLY easier with the move than staying with the stock xorg stuff. The upshot is that they've already demonstrated compatibility in the large with the current ecosystem and if they come up with comparable answers while they're moving things to the better solution, so much the better, really.
I'd have a problem if you couldn't do that or have NX be busted completely- neither are acceptable and shouldn't be considered so unless you've got comparable answers in hand. Unless you can do something identical with Wayland, you're going to have fewer takers than they think on this.
Ahh... But they have to serve him WITHIN the Court's jurisdiction, else it's not proper service and carries no force of law. It's not QUITE as simple as you're making it out to be. If they don't serve him within the confines of his jurisdiction and he's off on legit company business (which he is, actually) they can't serve him and when the clock on their ability to serve the subpoena runs out they've got to try for it again- and I'll bet good money they don't have the time to do it after the clock runs out on them this go-round.
And they can't serve him while out of the court's jurisdiction. Until he agrees to be party to the case via the subpoena, he is only subject to it while he's physically there in it's jurisdiction. Answer, don't be there but don't be seen to doing it deliberately by the court in doing it. There's a time limit on this and it's probably going to expire on Oracle before he's back to the corp offices in Texas. :-D
Indeed. Shrewd move as there's a time limit on trying to serve him as well. The PR people make it sound like he's deliberately doing it (contempt of court sanction time if so...) but it's not really that way- or can be phrased so it isn't so. Once the time limit's up, they have to re-file; but they may be out of time in the court case against SAP by that point.
The Judge was wrong in doing so if they did that. Fails due process several ways.
Many lawyers would be able to get at least a continuance if it was an ongoing trial and a reversal/dismissal on a default judgment if they tried a bit as the party wasn't properly served- and couldn't be so with what was done.
Service constitutes varying things- but that's not one of them. If you're in a divorce, they've given an allowance for, once you've tried to serve them physically, to serve the other party by public announcement, but it requires you proving that your attempt to serve them by process server produced no results over several months' time. And that's really only for a divorce. You HAVE to physically serve someone for things like this- or it doesn't count.
Now, I'd be a bit cheesed by HP's PR people making the statement they have- willfully avoiding a process server is a contempt of court type of thing. I'd have kept mum on it and just merely not disclosed it as they're under no obligation to hand them his schedule, etc.
There's also a requirement to have a PRODUCT that could be put into the Schedule to begin with. I'm pretty sure they've got a DUNS number at the least (Most major corps typically have one.) and the rest is easy.
Don't seize on what the GSA did for a reason for refusal here. I'm strongly suspecting that they were finding out what they needed to do to possibly get the business before they went and did the rest- because they'd have had to.
No, there's an issue there. It's called an EXPLICITLY CLOSED contract when they're obligated by law to provide OPEN bids for things. Claims of "enhanced security" and "integrated mail, etc." is bunk. There's a handful of actual solutions that meet all those criteria, actually, and Google was one of the prospective providers. I don't know where the lawsuit will go, but there IS a serious problem with the DOI deal there.
Heh... Classic bad (very bad...) car analogy...must be Slashdot I'm reading...
Got it in one. The explicit requiring of Microsoft's products pretty much goes beyond the typical stretching of the rules and stacking of the deck- in a way, I'm pretty sure of, they're not supposed to do in the first place.
Good luck with that. The systems out there barely handle things like standard English handwriting. The Chinese systems more or less allow them to enter in the glyphs, but they're still more-or-less doing graphics and not actual symbol entry except for a small subset of the glyph set.
Heh... Then they shouldn't be advertising it as the great big thing on their networks then. (And I concur on your assessment on things there...) I'm thinking they should re-think their signalling system thoughts. The MAIN cause of these problems is that they're thinking of everything in terms of the old voice switching system- seriously. Each of these signalling systems they're currently using are compensations for insisting upon expanding the behavior of SS7 to the next thing.
It's because those "great architects" and "great developers" are inured in the telecom industry insanity. (And it's that...) All these protocols are based on the premise that absolutely everything must be controlled by them- and that it be some variation on the theme of SS7. Seriously.
Actually, if it was going to go berserk in the example you gave, it'd have already done so. All those Droid, DroidX, Droid Incredible, and Droid2's would have done it just as readily as the iPhones would have.
Actually, Riddick is considered an anti-hero because he's a brutal killer, first and foremost- as much in tune with the animal side as his "human" side and uses both with a vengeance with little to no remorse in what he does. (Which is the source of the "scary" people point out periodically about him...)
To be sure, he pretty much butchers only the wicked (and more those that're outright BEGGING through their actions to get what he dishes out...), based on the stories we've seen in the movies and videogames, but he's got no qualms in letting anyone die or killing someone to be the one surviving a situation- also based on the stories we've been shown. Clearly amoral and definitely anti-hero material.
Actually, the intent is what you stated. The reality is more akin to what GP poster stated.
In truth, what was done wasn't reform. It wasn't and can't fix the system as it currently is. And, sadly, it makes things WORSE, not better.
If you believe that what you're saying is true, state it as opinion or back it up with facts. I'll be prepared to back up my remarks with facts, are you?
Actually, in this case, it might be deemed as such because of the end results from all the R&D that would ensue. If it's not violating the trade regulations for what we're restricting to China, it could be made as a case that it IS trade.
Now, whether or not Obama could catch the verbiage in a law and veto it, however, is another discussion altogether. We had them try to wedge amnesty for certain classes of illegal aliens into an appropriations bill for the DoD. Talk about utterly irrelevant and shameful to boot. What's to keep Congress from pushing in the law in question that might actually violate our treaties this way?
Nothing.
Which only applies to commerce crossing state lines, per the Constitution.
Some of the things the Federal government does in the name of the "Commerce Clause" aren't really what the framers had in mind. A thorough reading of things, like legislation, jurisprudence, etc. from the era indicate that this use of the "Commerce Clause" is a recent thing, allowed by one precedent that was debatable to begin with- something more like legislating from the bench.
The current interpretation of it where it also includes "significantly impacting" behaviors is not in the verbiage and isn't really anything other than someone in the Supreme Court legislating from the bench
Which is Linux with a Dalvik runtime and VM to provide UI presentation...
It's why I chuckle each and every time someone thinks that Android is magically all that much different. It's not.
It's already outdated? I don't see any mobile gaming vendor fielding an OMAP3 device yet. Hell Sony and Nintendo have yet to even try to offer the same class of tech right at the moment.
No, but each and every one of the other Socialist countries HAVE done this very thing or are dismantling their operations because they can't continue.
Socialism works fine so long as you can find people to take money from or largely each and every citizen actually is on the same page and actually working towards the same goal. Sweden and Norway are probably almost the only places on the Earth that you see everyone largely being on the same page and the execution of the Socialist system is the "right" one for the people. It is WRONG to go and point to Sweden and Norway and say that they can do it, so everyone else can. That's not at all accurate. Environmental conditions, population, general cultural bents, etc. will dictate whether or not you can even make Socialism work for extended periods of time. With all the freeloaders we have in this country, coupled with the WAY we've implemented Socialist functions of the government, there is no way to implement it. In the end, you need harsh controls on what goes down in the Socialist system- and things aren't as efficient even in Sweden or Norway (How quickly do you get access to medical care? I'd posit that it was about like the Canadian story, which means hours waits in many cases unless you're in a triage situation from a trauma that requires an ER visit.).
In the end, just pointing to those two countries is insufficient for argumentation purposes. They're not facts unto themselves and will not end an argument with someone prepared to discuss it rationally with you or anyone else.
WinMo and it's predecessors haven't been overly successful when you get to brass tacks. There's been relatively limited uptake of the devices that the stuff ran on. Part of it is that they tried to make it as close to the Windows experience as possible so it was "familiar" to people. It was familiar alright. It was also clumsy on most devices in the space. PalmOS fared better for longer because it was easier to use on mobile devices (Palm died less because it was unsuitable and more because it couldn't transition to a more capable OS version that allowed things like what iOS and Android now provide, even though they tried to do it for years...). BlackBerry's OS would be another instance of this.
I'm sure they're going to try to do it with WinMo. It's their only remotely credible play in this space. Sadly, it's a bit behind the times and the only way they hope to do anything really credible with it is if they succeed in scaring people with lawsuits like the one they've got with Moto right now. And that may be backfiring on them. People don't like seeing that sort of activity- especially with the party suing with such weak patents and a case that looks more like they're trying to mug them into coming back to the negotiation table to do licensing of some sort.
Heh... They're still clumsy to use. Windows is designed around a desktop machine paradigm, which doesn't work so hot in a handheld space and probably never will.
Yes, they did. However, they're still LATE.
There was PenPoint and Newton in that space at that point in time (and before them...)- and Microsoft's answer was expensive (even in comparison to the other two...) and was CLUMSY to use. It was done by bolting on a few extra functionalities that understood a digitizer pad on top of Windows 3.11 at the time and then later on Win95 and XP.