'Virons' is the plural form of 'virion', not 'virus'. A virion is the extracellular infective form of a virus. 'Viruses' is the correct plural form of 'virus': 'virii' is a bastardization of the latin plural of virus 'viri' which is almost never used ('virus' means venom, 'vir' means man, and 'viri' is always mistaken as men).
Historically, Microsoft has had two different teams to produce the same 'title' software: Internet Explorer and Microsoft Office both had teams strictly separate from their Windows counterparts. The Mac teams use Carbon and Cocoa simply because they are writing specifically for Macs.
I'm assuming it's cheaper for Microsoft to hire a new team than to port over their framework (in strictly this context, without worrying about the Evil Empire ideology ascribed to them). This has been good: Mac versions of Microsoft software (with the notable exception of Media Player) are usually better in terms of usuability, bugs, and features.
This is true; however, there is a corrollary which states that the conversation is essentially over due to the indirect relationship of the gravity of the insult (being related to Hitler being the worst) and the on-topicness [scientific term] of the discussion.
Godwin's Law is a natural law of Usenet named after Mike Godwin (godwin@E F F [edited].org) concerning Usenet "discussions". It reads, according to the Jargon File:
As a Usenet discussion grows longer, the probability of a comparison involving Nazis or Hitler approaches one.
Well, according to google, they treat their pigeons fairly well:
Isn't it cruel to keep pigeons penned up in tiny data coops?
Google exceeds all international standards for the ethical treatment of its pigeon personnel. Not only are they given free range of the coop and its window ledges, special break rooms have been set up for their convenience. These rooms are stocked with an assortment of delectable seeds and grains and feature the finest in European statuary for roosting.
The rational "thing to do" in this case is to disregard Plato's testimonial evidence of Atlantis. However, just because Plato isn't a reliable source on Atlantis does not mean Atlantis did not exist. That's just an appeal from ignorance, and is, as stated previously, fallacious.
There has been evidence of past civilizations that have been destroyed due to sublimatic activity. While this isn't proof of Atlantis, it does grant the conceivability of its existence, and thus, Occam's razor does not apply. There are other factors beyond simple second order evidence which are used when determining if it actually existed.
There's a whole lot of extant Greek lit. from before Plato, but no Atlantis until him.
There's also a whole lot of Greek lit. that's either a) in the bottom of the Alexandrian harbour or b) been destroyed in the Alexandrian fire in c. 272 CE.
Also, he has a known proclivity for making up stories. Unless strong proof to the contrary is forthcoming, the only reasonable hypothesis is that he made up Atlantis, too.
We have that problem here from time to time, and the way we solve it is by actually calling up or e-mailing the ISP explaining the situation. Usually they're helpful and will give you directions on how to prevent further blacklisting.
You give a false dilemma. You seem to think that there were only two options:
A) Invade Iraq and kill 8-10 thousand civilians. B) Not invade Iraq and let 40-50 thousand civilians die because sanctions couldn't be lifted.
There were several other options, which you might want to think about:
C) Invade Iraq and not kill so many civilians by being much more careful D) Oust Saddam without invading Iraq (we do it all the time in other countries) E) Lift Sanctions. Before we decided to impose sanctions after the Kuwait invasion, Iraq was one of the more prosperous nations. People were fed. F) Find a relatively peacable solution to ousting the current regime. They do exist. For reference, see 1989: Germany, Poland, Soviet Union, Romania, Czechoslovakia and 2002 (?): Serbia.
Then your analogy was flawed in the first place. What I said is not wrong...but it does change things, insofar as a "pure" paraphrase would not produce a work with its own value. However, since this is a new program that does things the old one didn't (plays various files in Linux) it is not analogous to a simple paraphrase.
The distinction you're making is simply irrelevant. By changing the cover of a book and putting your name on it, does it make the book a novel work? (Since you're not keen on rhetoricals, the answer is 'no')
And furthermore, if you want to get right down to the nitty-gritty, the analogy is further broken because the authors of this work didn't get to read the other work.
What does the audience have to do with it? The work is copyrighted regardless of who has read the work. If you murdered a man, but nobody caught you, would you still be a morally-good person?
So, let's say I write a book. I publish it through Cambridge University Press. It sells about 400 copies.
Three years later, a colleague of mine takes my book, paraphrases it (and doesn't cite me mind you), puts a new cover on it. Because he knows some good marketing people, he publishes it and it sells about 4 million copies.
Are you telling me that he didn't just violate my copyright?
One custom-made leotard (Size: XXXL): $75.00 1 can of acrylic paint: $12.95 3 yards of el-tape (blue): $30 dollars Having the largest camel-toe at Penguicon 1.0: Priceless.
Parent is correct; I believe the rationale was that major windows releases would be named after mountains, where Longhorn is a bar halfway between Whistler and Blackcomb, indicating that Longhorn was meant to be an interim release rather than a paradigm shift (think windows 98 rather than windows 95 or XP).
Slashdot Mirror
You must not have checked since OS 9. Net boot
Mac OS X's single user mode allows for root login without a password. So much for your last sentence.
'Virons' is the plural form of 'virion', not 'virus'. A virion is the extracellular infective form of a virus. 'Viruses' is the correct plural form of 'virus': 'virii' is a bastardization of the latin plural of virus 'viri' which is almost never used ('virus' means venom, 'vir' means man, and 'viri' is always mistaken as men).
Welcome to my world.
The wireless age is a mixed blessing.
Historically, Microsoft has had two different teams to produce the same 'title' software: Internet Explorer and Microsoft Office both had teams strictly separate from their Windows counterparts. The Mac teams use Carbon and Cocoa simply because they are writing specifically for Macs.
I'm assuming it's cheaper for Microsoft to hire a new team than to port over their framework (in strictly this context, without worrying about the Evil Empire ideology ascribed to them). This has been good: Mac versions of Microsoft software (with the notable exception of Media Player) are usually better in terms of usuability, bugs, and features.
This is true; however, there is a corrollary which states that the conversation is essentially over due to the indirect relationship of the gravity of the insult (being related to Hitler being the worst) and the on-topicness [scientific term] of the discussion.
From How to post about Nazis and get away with it:
It's a real thing.
Well, according to google, they treat their pigeons fairly well:
I am a Computer Information Systems Professional at a major Fortune 500 corporation.
For the rest of us, please read as; 'I am a systems support analyst for a company that doesn't know any better.'
Occam's razor simply does not apply here.
The rational "thing to do" in this case is to disregard Plato's testimonial evidence of Atlantis. However, just because Plato isn't a reliable source on Atlantis does not mean Atlantis did not exist. That's just an appeal from ignorance, and is, as stated previously, fallacious.
There has been evidence of past civilizations that have been destroyed due to sublimatic activity. While this isn't proof of Atlantis, it does grant the conceivability of its existence, and thus, Occam's razor does not apply. There are other factors beyond simple second order evidence which are used when determining if it actually existed.
In Soviet Russia, jokes repeat you!
Sorry, had to do it.
There's a whole lot of extant Greek lit. from before Plato, but no Atlantis until him.
There's also a whole lot of Greek lit. that's either a) in the bottom of the Alexandrian harbour or b) been destroyed in the Alexandrian fire in c. 272 CE.
Also, he has a known proclivity for making up stories. Unless strong proof to the contrary is forthcoming, the only reasonable hypothesis is that he made up Atlantis, too.
That's just fallacious.
We have that problem here from time to time, and the way we solve it is by actually calling up or e-mailing the ISP explaining the situation. Usually they're helpful and will give you directions on how to prevent further blacklisting.
Just a little nag.. the correct mereological problem is "Theseus's Ship," not "Ulysses's Ship".
/philosophy dork
Obviously, the EU hasn't discovered the real ultimate power yet...
You give a false dilemma. You seem to think that there were only two options:
A) Invade Iraq and kill 8-10 thousand civilians.
B) Not invade Iraq and let 40-50 thousand civilians die because sanctions couldn't be lifted.
There were several other options, which you might want to think about:
C) Invade Iraq and not kill so many civilians by being much more careful
D) Oust Saddam without invading Iraq (we do it all the time in other countries)
E) Lift Sanctions. Before we decided to impose sanctions after the Kuwait invasion, Iraq was one of the more prosperous nations. People were fed.
F) Find a relatively peacable solution to ousting the current regime. They do exist. For reference, see 1989: Germany, Poland, Soviet Union, Romania, Czechoslovakia and 2002 (?): Serbia.
None. Internet2 is for research and government institutions so that they don't have to deal with what they lovingly call "commodity traffic."
Don't expect these types of speed on the Internet or for consumer use.
Then your analogy was flawed in the first place. What I said is not wrong...but it does change things, insofar as a "pure" paraphrase would not produce a work with its own value. However, since this is a new program that does things the old one didn't (plays various files in Linux) it is not analogous to a simple paraphrase.
The distinction you're making is simply irrelevant. By changing the cover of a book and putting your name on it, does it make the book a novel work? (Since you're not keen on rhetoricals, the answer is 'no')
And furthermore, if you want to get right down to the nitty-gritty, the analogy is further broken because the authors of this work didn't get to read the other work.
What does the audience have to do with it? The work is copyrighted regardless of who has read the work. If you murdered a man, but nobody caught you, would you still be a morally-good person?
The question was largely rhetorical, and you're simply wrong.
Copyrights protect novel work. Simply paraphrasing a novel work does not produce a novel work.
So, let's say I write a book. I publish it through Cambridge University Press. It sells about 400 copies.
Three years later, a colleague of mine takes my book, paraphrases it (and doesn't cite me mind you), puts a new cover on it. Because he knows some good marketing people, he publishes it and it sells about 4 million copies.
Are you telling me that he didn't just violate my copyright?
One custom-made leotard (Size: XXXL): $75.00
1 can of acrylic paint: $12.95
3 yards of el-tape (blue): $30 dollars
Having the largest camel-toe at Penguicon 1.0: Priceless.
Good, it was a terrible browser anyway.
Maybe I'm out of line here, but if the acronym is more than 6 letters AND you have to explain it immediately after, did it really help?
I know this was supposed to be a joke, but come on, M-Theory (and subsequently superstring theory) is 9+2 dimensions.
Parent is correct; I believe the rationale was that major windows releases would be named after mountains, where Longhorn is a bar halfway between Whistler and Blackcomb, indicating that Longhorn was meant to be an interim release rather than a paradigm shift (think windows 98 rather than windows 95 or XP).