when blank CDs are MUCH more likely to be used for non-music purposes?
What's the basis for this claim?
The levy is supposed to be set so that the appropriate amount of royalties goes to the copyright holders. If you happen to be one of those who uses CDs for non-music purposes you lose, but just think how much you're helping someone who uses CDs only for music recording. Unless there aren't many such people, as you are claiming. Proof?
Sure, sometimes MS gives more detail than Google, and presumably sometimes the reverse is true. But the point is that when MS doesn't have the detail, it falls down badly.
Request 5 has to do with the disclosure of personal correspondence. The request doesn't ask for all data necessary to duplicate the results (that's a reasonable request); it asks for information on correspondence about it. That's truly none of their business.
If you were asked for a list of all the questions you've received about a paper you published, including your responses and your justification for them, would you think that's reasonable? I wouldn't. Some of them are stupid questions, and it would be embarrassing to the questioner for me to publish them; some would reveal unpublished ideas for further research, and are implicitly confidential; I would probably have given incorrect answers to some, since I don't check my email as carefully as I check things I submit for publication; I would probably forget some, and then the committee would accuse me of trying to hide something.
It makes me think that the original editorial is based on someone's typo. They didn't ask for "personal financial information", but they did ask for "personal and financial information", and the personal part of their requests are not reasonable.
I think you're right that they didn't ask for personal financial information, they were asking about research support, which is fine.
But what is the justification for this request:
5. Regarding study data and related information that is not publicly archived, what requests have you or your co-authors received for data relating to the climate change studies, what was your response, and why?
How can this be any of the Committee's business? How much time are these scientists expected to spend meeting these requests?
However, the above quote shows quite aptly one of the major flaws with Western Medicine. It seems to think that all human beings are identical.
Where did you get the impression "Western Medicine" was involved in this? That quote appears to have come from "journalist and author" Carl Honore. It's not news that journalists oversimplify things.
Yes braniac, you are correct. If the cost of adhering to individual states' DNC rules outweigh the profit, then of course they won't call that state. This is why the DMA is fighting to abolish the state lists and let the whole DNC issue be settled with one list at the federal level. OMG, people actually want to make more money!! shocker
I don't know your constitution that well, but if the state laws were unconstitutional, I imagine the DMA would be taking them to court instead of lobbying the feds. So it seems like those somewhat sovereign states have decided that you'll have to go somewhere else to make money. So why don't you respect their decision?
Like it or not, the legitimate telemarketers are trying to run a business just like any other, and are putting a lot of effort towards making sure that they do not call forbidden numbers, but unfair fees by individual states make this unnecissarily difficult and expensive.
Sounds like these telemarketers can't take a hint. It's impossible to make money calling some states, because of rules that those states have put in place. So don't call them!
We have a grad student computing lab. A few years ago we upgraded the computers, and at the same time switched them all to Linux. Most of the grads stopped using them, and moved to the undergrad lab, which runs Windows.
This year we're upgrading the computers again, and we plan to make them all dual boot, but I don't expect many of the grads to choose to boot into Linux.
Rather than taking an offensive stance, let design a system that runs in a distributed way (a network) that can detect a particular spam email as it is sent out to millions of addresses. Then, merely in response to that event, the nodes on the network coordinate to create an automated reply to unsubscribe from that piece of email.
Sounds fine, until someone forges your address into the spam and you receive the million unsubscribes. I already get bounces from clueless admins due to spammers who forge my address into the mail headers. I don't want vigilante attacks too.
Actually there was an article up yesterday with exactly your complaint. Apparently a law just got passed in Canada and that was one of the worries; now using Google to search for pirated works in Canada makes Google break the law.
...there has been no security audit that found this flaw....everybody's computers won't be automatically updated just because there is a patch that all total geeks love....the source haven't been read by all who uses it, and the flaw wasn't found.
In fact, this flaw was found by a security audit of an open source project, not by any of the closed source projects (like Microsoft Office) that make use of it.
Re:Gadget Filled
on
The Escapist
·
· Score: 2, Funny
Gadget filled? That sounds like a Harlequin romance. It doesn't need much editing to become one: "My assistant tossed her hair impetuously." "The message flashed across his chiselled features."
I'm sorry to hear that you had a melanoma, but Ireland and Germany are actually surprisingly far north. Ireland is between 52N and 55N, and Germany is between 47N and 55N. By comparison, New Zealand lies between 35S and 47S.
The Gulf Stream makes northern Europe a lot warmer than the equivalent latitude in the southern hemisphere.
Other posters have convinced me it's not only latitude, but latitude plays a really big part of it.
Re:sounds like the upgrade from Win95 to Win98
on
Longhorn Preview
·
· Score: 1
main upgrade is fancy windowing? check.
What fancy windowing was introduced in Win98? The Win98 UI was basically the same as Win95.
The claim might be true, but things are complicated. See here for recent measurements and here for what it was like in January.
I suspect the actual cause of the high skin cancer rate is really a combination of all of the factors: population that is mostly northern European, not adapted to the sun; low latitudes; higher insolation in the summer due to perihelion; low ozone levels; nice weather; nice beaches. They just seem to have lucked out in all the categories.
Okay, so Sydney wasn't the best choice, but anywhere in Australia would work. None of Australia (except Tasmania) is as far south as Boston is north.
The fact that the summer sun is brighter in Australia than at a similar northern latitude at the equivalent time of year has an effect (do you know how large? A quick google search didn't tell me), but I'd guess it's on the order of moving a few degrees closer to the equator, not as big as the difference in latitude between Sydney and Boston.
From personal experience I can also add that the sun in the Northern Hemisphere never seemed as hot or burning as the sun in Australia. I could walk around in the summer sun in Boston and barely get even a touch of colour. In Australia I would be burnt in less than an hour - probably quicker. Sun screen is very important in Australia as is a hat and a shirt.
It's the latitude. Boston is around 42 N. Australia is mostly between 16 S (Cairns) and 34 S (Sydney). In the northern hemisphere, you should be comparing yourself to somewhere in Mexico or North Africa, not the northern USA.
The biggest problem with Windows is there are all kinds of inconsistencies. For example, last night I wanted to try the shortcut for creating a new Excel Spreadsheet.
Excel is not part of Windows. You're complaining about inconsistencies in Excel's UI. They're both made by Microsoft, but problems with Excel are not problems with Windows.
It's not all that hard to find inconsistencies in the Windows UI, but they are actually becoming less common over time. For example, shortcuts in the start menu in XP act a lot more like other shortcuts than they did in Win95.
Sorry, your arguments don't convince me. Al Qaeda was directly attacked in Afghanistan, quite successfully. Trying to say that the Scuds in Israel or the Argentinians in the Falklands weren't an attack because there was some prior history is like saying there has never been an attack. There's always prior history.
Now, if you had said "no nation that keeps a stock of bombs has ever been directly attacked by an identifable enemy that expected nuclear retaliation", I think you'd be right. The first part of your claim, that nuclear weapons are defensive, that's right too.
However, the real reason that these bombs proliferate is for defense, as misguided as that sounds. No nation that keeps a stock of bombs has ever been directly attacked by an identifable enemy.
I think you're wrong:
Argentina invaded the Falklands/Malvinas which the UK believed it owned. Iraq sent missiles into Israel in the first Gulf War. Al Qaeda sent airliners into buildings in the USA.
In all of these cases a nuclear nation was attacked by a non-nuclear aggressor.
Slashdot Mirror
when blank CDs are MUCH more likely to be used for non-music purposes?
What's the basis for this claim?
The levy is supposed to be set so that the appropriate amount of royalties goes to the copyright holders. If you happen to be one of those who uses CDs for non-music purposes you lose, but just think how much you're helping someone who uses CDs only for music recording. Unless there aren't many such people, as you are claiming. Proof?
Sure, sometimes MS gives more detail than Google, and presumably sometimes the reverse is true. But the point is that when MS doesn't have the detail, it falls down badly.
Request 5 has to do with the disclosure of personal correspondence. The request doesn't ask for all data necessary to duplicate the results (that's a reasonable request); it asks for information on correspondence about it. That's truly none of their business.
If you were asked for a list of all the questions you've received about a paper you published, including your responses and your justification for them, would you think that's reasonable? I wouldn't. Some of them are stupid questions, and it would be embarrassing to the questioner for me to publish them; some would reveal unpublished ideas for further research, and are implicitly confidential; I would probably have given incorrect answers to some, since I don't check my email as carefully as I check things I submit for publication; I would probably forget some, and then the committee would accuse me of trying to hide something.
It makes me think that the original editorial is based on someone's typo. They didn't ask for "personal financial information", but they did ask for "personal and financial information", and the personal part of their requests are not reasonable.
I think you're right that they didn't ask for personal financial information, they were asking about research support, which is fine.
But what is the justification for this request:
5. Regarding study data and related information that is not publicly archived, what requests
have you or your co-authors received for data relating to the climate change studies, what
was your response, and why?
How can this be any of the Committee's business? How much time are these scientists expected to spend meeting these requests?
However, the above quote shows quite aptly one of the major flaws with Western Medicine. It seems to think that all human beings are identical.
Where did you get the impression "Western Medicine" was involved in this? That quote appears to have come from "journalist and author" Carl Honore. It's not news that journalists oversimplify things.
Yes braniac, you are correct. If the cost of adhering to individual states' DNC rules outweigh the profit, then of course they won't call that state. This is why the DMA is fighting to abolish the state lists and let the whole DNC issue be settled with one list at the federal level. OMG, people actually want to make more money!! shocker
I don't know your constitution that well, but if the state laws were unconstitutional, I imagine the DMA would be taking them to court instead of lobbying the feds. So it seems like those somewhat sovereign states have decided that you'll have to go somewhere else to make money. So why don't you respect their decision?
Like it or not, the legitimate telemarketers are trying to run a business just like any other, and are putting a lot of effort towards making sure that they do not call forbidden numbers, but unfair fees by individual states make this unnecissarily difficult and expensive.
Sounds like these telemarketers can't take a hint. It's impossible to make money calling some states, because of rules that those states have put in place. So don't call them!
Here's a case:
We have a grad student computing lab. A few years ago we upgraded the computers, and at the same time switched them all to Linux. Most of the grads stopped using them, and moved to the undergrad lab, which runs Windows.
This year we're upgrading the computers again, and we plan to make them all dual boot, but I don't expect many of the grads to choose to boot into Linux.
Rather than taking an offensive stance, let design a system that runs in a distributed way (a network) that can detect a particular spam email as it is sent out to millions of addresses. Then, merely in response to that event, the nodes on the network coordinate to create an automated reply to unsubscribe from that piece of email.
Sounds fine, until someone forges your address into the spam and you receive the million unsubscribes. I already get bounces from clueless admins due to spammers who forge my address into the mail headers. I don't want vigilante attacks too.
Bash the US all you want, just remember that you can feel free to bash it precisely because of the first amendment. A value the UN sorely lacks
You're wrong about that. The UN certainly values bashing the US.
Actually there was an article up yesterday with exactly your complaint. Apparently a law just got passed in Canada and that was one of the worries; now using Google to search for pirated works in Canada makes Google break the law.
No, there has been a bill presented to parliament for first reading that may have this unintended effect.
That's why I prefer US IP law.
The misreading above makes me wonder if you have any idea what it says?
The anti-spyware tool is different from the malicious software removal tool. The latter is run on every windows update. It targets viruses, worms, etc. rather than adware.
Who said auditing isn't fun?
In fact, this flaw was found by a security audit of an open source project, not by any of the closed source projects (like Microsoft Office) that make use of it.
Gadget filled? That sounds like a Harlequin romance. It doesn't need much editing to become one: "My assistant tossed her hair impetuously." "The message flashed across his chiselled features."
I'm sorry to hear that you had a melanoma, but Ireland and Germany are actually surprisingly far north. Ireland is between 52N and 55N, and Germany is between 47N and 55N. By comparison, New Zealand lies between 35S and 47S.
The Gulf Stream makes northern Europe a lot warmer than the equivalent latitude in the southern hemisphere.
Other posters have convinced me it's not only latitude, but latitude plays a really big part of it.
main upgrade is fancy windowing? check.
What fancy windowing was introduced in Win98? The Win98 UI was basically the same as Win95.
The only difference between northern climates and australia is that the southern hemisphere has a lower ozone density http://www.webwombat.com.au/careers_ed/education/o zone.htm
Hmm? That web page makes no such claim.
The claim might be true, but things are complicated. See here for recent measurements and here for what it was like in January.
I suspect the actual cause of the high skin cancer rate is really a combination of all of the factors: population that is mostly northern European, not adapted to the sun; low latitudes; higher insolation in the summer due to perihelion; low ozone levels; nice weather; nice beaches. They just seem to have lucked out in all the categories.
Okay, so Sydney wasn't the best choice, but anywhere in Australia would work. None of Australia (except Tasmania) is as far south as Boston is north.
The fact that the summer sun is brighter in Australia than at a similar northern latitude at the equivalent time of year has an effect (do you know how large? A quick google search didn't tell me), but I'd guess it's on the order of moving a few degrees closer to the equator, not as big as the difference in latitude between Sydney and Boston.
From personal experience I can also add that the sun in the Northern Hemisphere never seemed as hot or burning as the sun in Australia. I could walk around in the summer sun in Boston and barely get even a touch of colour. In Australia I would be burnt in less than an hour - probably quicker. Sun screen is very important in Australia as is a hat and a shirt.
It's the latitude. Boston is around 42 N. Australia is mostly between 16 S (Cairns) and 34 S (Sydney). In the northern hemisphere, you should be comparing yourself to somewhere in Mexico or North Africa, not the northern USA.
The biggest problem with Windows is there are all kinds of inconsistencies. For example, last night I wanted to try the shortcut for creating a new Excel Spreadsheet.
Excel is not part of Windows. You're complaining about inconsistencies in Excel's UI. They're both made by Microsoft, but problems with Excel are not problems with Windows.
It's not all that hard to find inconsistencies in the Windows UI, but they are actually becoming less common over time. For example, shortcuts in the start menu in XP act a lot more like other shortcuts than they did in Win95.
Arg! The original post was supposed to be funny!! I got a good laugh out of seeing it get mod'ed as informative.
I didn't think it was funny, you insensitive clod.
I think you missed this: "Of 100 UK leading consumer websites that SciVisum tested...".
I imagine they chose that sample size to make the percentage calculations perfectly accurate.
Sorry, your arguments don't convince me. Al Qaeda was directly attacked in Afghanistan, quite successfully. Trying to say that the Scuds in Israel or the Argentinians in the Falklands weren't an attack because there was some prior history is like saying there has never been an attack. There's always prior history.
Now, if you had said "no nation that keeps a stock of bombs has ever been directly attacked by an identifable enemy that expected nuclear retaliation", I think you'd be right. The first part of your claim, that nuclear weapons are defensive, that's right too.
However, the real reason that these bombs proliferate is for defense, as misguided as that sounds. No nation that keeps a stock of bombs has ever been directly attacked by an identifable enemy.
I think you're wrong:
Argentina invaded the Falklands/Malvinas which the UK believed it owned. Iraq sent missiles into Israel in the first Gulf War. Al Qaeda sent airliners into buildings in the USA.
In all of these cases a nuclear nation was attacked by a non-nuclear aggressor.