Assume for the moment that the grand jury made the right decision in this instance, and that the officer had a video camera and what it showed matched all the evidence that the grand jury based its decision on.
How many believe this would have stopped, or even reduced, the riots?
Given the chance, of course the government would backdoor itself. If the government isn't the origin of the idea that the left hand doesn't know what the right hand is doing, it is at least the poster child. The only real question would be whether they've yet succeeded.
Even though the main article has a lot of drivel about the old days, there are things we have lost.
As an EMACS user, I really do hate it that other editors and readers (e.g. adobe reader) don't let me view multiple sections of a document at one time. Lately, Adobe Reader on linux seems to have adopted a "feature" that if I open up a second copy of a document, it instead just brings the window of the first copy to the front, so I can't even use that to work around the lack of multiple views of a single file. (I think I found a way around that problem, I just can't remember what it was.)
It used to be in unix you would run one process for one task. Now it has become popular to run one process to manage many GUI windows; instead of an Xterm process per window, we have one gnome terminal process handling all terminal windows. When that process dies, you lose all your terminal windows. The same thing applies to browsers: Why do I lose all my windows when the browser crashes instead of just one? Because they couldn't implement proper file locking to allow multiple proceses to access the.mozilla directory?
And the NFS / NIS multiple workstations with a single home directory used to just work, and was expected to work. fvwm was fine. But now Gnome has decided it doesn't have to handle multiple versions of Gnome (from workstations with different software installed) accessing ~/.gnome*. It even is screwy if you are only logged in one place at a time but switch between workstations of the same version of Gnome but radically different screen resolutions. If I log in on a lab machine, firefox won't start because my default profile is still in use back at my desk!
Not so long ago, Gnome went on a "simplify everything" spree, removing features left and right. Among other things, I dearly miss edge flipping, where you move the mouse cursor past the edge of the screen to change desktops. So much so that I go through the hoops of installing a non-standard window manager to get around it. Even though I don't know who Dean Johnson is and can't remember where I got the quote from, I found he agreed with me, and I've had a quote from him in my rotation of random email.sigs ever since:
"The ONLY thing that I really miss is mouse edge flipping and I will punch Havoc the next time I see him for that." -- Dean Johnson
Believe it or not there are actually "channels" that you can tune in using an "antenna" for "free" in "HD"
Shocking....
ummmmmm, Digital != HD
But your point is otherwise correct.
The original point is not incorrect. There are channels you can tune in using an antenna, for free. A subset of those channels (until the analog cutoff in the US anyway) are digital, and a subset of the digital channels are HD.
So there are free HD channels using an antenna. I watched the olympics and the superbowl in HD for free, and I'm not exactly a sports fan.
First, IANAL. But I do pay close attention to copyright laws, they affect all of us.
Second, the ruling on ringtones not being a derived work: it probably means that the ringtone is just another mechanical copy of the song, for which the record labels would have to pay whatever fee they've already negotiated with the artist in their current contracts, instead of being a derived work of a different sort which would require new negotiations with each artist.
I know that's not what the article says, and I haven't researched it. But it's what makes sense. (Yeah, yeah, since when does making sense have anything to do with copyright law?)
Third, if you have a song on your phone and a ringtone, the ringtone is kept in a separate file. It is a copy of the song, subject to copyright laws (because you've made a copy). This is necessary because the ring mechanisms in the phone always play the whole file, from the begining.
What we need instead is phone ringers that will use an existing, full length song file, but start playing at an offset into the file, and only play part of the file. Then you only need one file on the phone, and the whole question of paying twice is moot.
I saw this on bash.org a while ago, and I thought of it the instant I read this headline:
<Cobra> so i was watching a pr0n <Thunder> wait <Thunder> why u guys always say pr0n instead of porn ?? Thunder has been kicked by Guardian (No porn on this channel !) <Cobra>... <Cobra> so i was watching a pr0n
I know they're aimed at kids, but I thought the Spy Fox series by Humongous Entertainment was very funny, nice spoof on spy movies. "A spy without gadgets is like a shopping cart without a broken wheel," or words to that effect.
I need to be less adversarial here. The command line is what I use because it's what I know. Let's say I'm always looking to add to my bag of tools, and if there are times when using Nautilus or some other GUI file manager would be better for me, or Joe shell user, I'd like to know what you (all of you) think they might be, so I can try it and decide for myself.
Could we re-cast my previous reply in a different light? "Finding the right picture in a pile of 500? Hey, I do use a GUI for that, it's just Firefox + a photo album, not Nautilus. Any other examples?"
Someone mentioned automatically opening up a shell in the directory that you're looking at in the browser. (I REALLY have wanted that on windows occasionally -- does it exist there?) It occurs to me that it'd be really usefull (for me) if a gui filemanager could put the pathnames of the file(s) I click on in the cut/paste buffer so I can paste them into a shell window, or maybe drag & drop into the shell window. (Usually when I think of a good idea like this, it's already there and I just didn't know about it. Feel free to rub it in if that's the case!)
I'd like to see you select the correct jpeg out of a directory of 500 without an icon preview.
That is something I don't do very often, and when I do I use FireFox pointing at my html photo album.
I think what an individual's common activites are may have a lot to bear on this. I'm much more likely to search for a text string in a tree of source code than search for a particular.jpg in a single directory of 500.
e.g. emacs [M-x grep-find "what I'm looking for"] which runs "find . -type f -print0 | xargs -0 -e grep -n -e "what I'm looking for". (Is there an easy way to do that in the typical GUI file browser?)
The only thing I've ever bothered to learn about Nautilus is how to disable it after every upgrade.
Exactly!
What are these file explorer / desktop things for, anyway? A shell window with cd, ls, tab completion, and wildcards usually gets me where I want to be faster, and when I want to look at the file tree in a more "browsing" fashion, I use dirmode in EMACS.
Now I'll go back and RTFA, but if anyone who uses the tools I mention switches to using Nautilus (or similar) for some particular task they find easier there, I'd love to hear about it. Seriously, if I'm missing something, I want to know.
...I'm really sick and tired of how the Slashdot community (as any internet community would) almost universally reacts to any and all evidence that pornography might be *gasp* a bad thing with a combination of rationalization and equivication...you're trying to excuse/justify your behavior in the face of overwhelming evidence that pornography - like smoking (as an example) is bad for people and bad for society...
Don't you feel a little silly that you said that without actually offering any of this supposed overwhelming evidence?
I'm the type that has a Treo 650, but my wife is the kind of person that wants a simple phone.
She's got the hang of a built in directory, but notes that now we never can remember people's phone numbers when we don't have our own phone with us.
All her previous phones had monochrome LCD screens. Her latest one is color. But you can't read it in direct sunlight, and she doesn't really care that it's color!
Extra options just make the phone harder to use (more complicated menu system).
Even with my Treo 650, I note that my cheapo digital camera is better than the one in the phone, and I have an ipod because it's a better mp3 player. It's nice to have the phone and palm pilot in one unit, so I keep the calendar with me at all times, but my previous cell phones were actually better at being a phone!
This is Slashdot, IANAL, etc., but: If a company modifies a GPL program, distributes it in violation of the license, and is completely aware of what they are doing, the company still owns the copyright on their modifications.
The courts may make them pay monetary damages, and may force them to comply with the GPL, but there are two ways to comply with the GPL: distribute source to your modifications also under the GPL, or don't distribute at all. The company would probably still have the choice between discontinuing their distribution of the GPL code or releasing their modifications. I don't think anyone can limit them to the option of releasing under the GPL.
Why does someone always say it's the teacher's fault?
Here's my suggestion: It's the kid's fault. If you choose to not pay attention in class, that's YOUR fault. No one else's. Enough of the bullshit about teachers needing new methods and ways to make learning fun. Sure, those help, but frankly, if the student has no work ethic, he/she isn't going to learn.
But, IMHO, it is the teachers fault if they give a passing grade to such a student!
I'm not sure I'd trust the government to write the software.
It is in their best interest to make it easy to file, but it isn't in their best interest to make sure I've found each and every deduction, for my lowest possible tax bill.
One I hear a lot today is, you need to have a firewall on your computer or you will get HACKED!!! If you have a windows 98 box (i'm not talking about servers here), which is virus free and has the latest patches... You don't need to have a firewall. If you are running no server software or anything that would allow any connections into your computer, you don't have to worry about blocking port 80 and such.
Get serious. All of us here know that getting hacked involves exploiting holes in software that were unknown at the time of release.
A firewall simply helps by limiting the number of services that are exposed to the net at large, by trying to ensure that nobody can pretend to be one of your local, trusted machines, and perhaps by watching for known attacks. No firewall could have kept code red out of a IIS server that was intentionally exposed to the net, at least not unless it was upgraded after the attack was known.
Similarly, having a virus-free, up-to-date Win 98 installation does nothing to protect you from attacks not currently known.
A firewall may protect you from such an attack, if the attack requires, e.g., using a port you haven't opened up to the internet at large. But there is by no means a guarantee.
Categories and subcategories map well to a particular view of the world. But to
make effective use of the hierarchy, you are forced to use that view of the world.
Reminds me of a M*A*S*H eppisode. "Radar, where did you file the maps to the minefields?" "They're under 'B' for 'Boom'!"
In an ideal world, there should be only one way to do it, BUT the USER should be able to determine what this one way is.
I don't think I'd like to borrow your car under these circumstances.:-)
(Maybe you like it better that way, but what about emergencies?)
Not to be elitist, but I think maybe there will always be differences between
what's best for the masses and the desires of
"the geeks". The automobile I use for general
transportation differs in many ways from both the rigs of semi drivers and the cars on a NASCAR race track. Why aren't they trying to pound everything into a one size fits all scenario?
Slashdot Mirror
Assume for the moment that the grand jury made the right decision in this instance, and that the officer had a video camera and what it showed matched all the evidence that the grand jury based its decision on.
How many believe this would have stopped, or even reduced, the riots?
Given the chance, of course the government would backdoor itself. If the government isn't the origin of the idea that the left hand doesn't know what the right hand is doing, it is at least the poster child. The only real question would be whether they've yet succeeded.
Even though the main article has a lot of drivel about the old days, there are things we have lost.
As an EMACS user, I really do hate it that other editors and readers (e.g. adobe reader) don't let me view multiple sections of a document at one time. Lately, Adobe Reader on linux seems to have adopted a "feature" that if I open up a second copy of a document, it instead just brings the window of the first copy to the front, so I can't even use that to work around the lack of multiple views of a single file. (I think I found a way around that problem, I just can't remember what it was.)
It used to be in unix you would run one process for one task. Now it has become popular to run one process to manage many GUI windows; instead of an Xterm process per window, we have one gnome terminal process handling all terminal windows. When that process dies, you lose all your terminal windows. The same thing applies to browsers: Why do I lose all my windows when the browser crashes instead of just one? Because they couldn't implement proper file locking to allow multiple proceses to access the .mozilla directory?
And the NFS / NIS multiple workstations with a single home directory used to just work, and was expected to work. fvwm was fine. But now Gnome has decided it doesn't have to handle multiple versions of Gnome (from workstations with different software installed) accessing ~/.gnome*. It even is screwy if you are only logged in one place at a time but switch between workstations of the same version of Gnome but radically different screen resolutions. If I log in on a lab machine, firefox won't start because my default profile is still in use back at my desk!
Not so long ago, Gnome went on a "simplify everything" spree, removing features left and right. Among other things, I dearly miss edge flipping, where you move the mouse cursor past the edge of the screen to change desktops. So much so that I go through the hoops of installing a non-standard window manager to get around it. Even though I don't know who Dean Johnson is and can't remember where I got the quote from, I found he agreed with me, and I've had a quote from him in my rotation of random email .sigs ever since:
"The ONLY thing that I really miss is mouse edge flipping and I will punch Havoc the next time I see him for that." -- Dean Johnson
Believe it or not there are actually "channels" that you can tune in using an "antenna" for "free" in "HD"
Shocking....
ummmmmm, Digital != HD
But your point is otherwise correct.
The original point is not incorrect. There are channels you can tune in using an antenna, for free. A subset of those channels (until the analog cutoff in the US anyway) are digital, and a subset of the digital channels are HD.
So there are free HD channels using an antenna. I watched the olympics and the superbowl in HD for free, and I'm not exactly a sports fan.
I can't tell you how many times I've turned on the TV, and used rewind on tivo to go back to the begining of what's currently showing.
I'd prefer SSD (that is, a version of it that doesn't wear out too quickly for this purpose) for the live TV buffer.
First, IANAL. But I do pay close attention to copyright laws, they affect all of us.
Second, the ruling on ringtones not being a derived work: it probably means that the ringtone is just another mechanical copy of the song, for which the record labels would have to pay whatever fee they've already negotiated with the artist in their current contracts, instead of being a derived work of a different sort which would require new negotiations with each artist.
I know that's not what the article says, and I haven't researched it. But it's what makes sense. (Yeah, yeah, since when does making sense have anything to do with copyright law?)
Third, if you have a song on your phone and a ringtone, the ringtone is kept in a separate file. It is a copy of the song, subject to copyright laws (because you've made a copy). This is necessary because the ring mechanisms in the phone always play the whole file, from the begining.
What we need instead is phone ringers that will use an existing, full length song file, but start playing at an offset into the file, and only play part of the file. Then you only need one file on the phone, and the whole question of paying twice is moot.
I saw this on bash.org a while ago, and I thought of it the instant I read this headline:
...
<Cobra> so i was watching a pr0n
<Thunder> wait
<Thunder> why u guys always say pr0n instead of porn ??
Thunder has been kicked by Guardian (No porn on this channel !)
<Cobra>
<Cobra> so i was watching a pr0n
I know they're aimed at kids, but I thought the Spy Fox series by Humongous Entertainment was very funny, nice spoof on spy movies. "A spy without gadgets is like a shopping cart without a broken wheel," or words to that effect.
I need to be less adversarial here. The command line is what I use because it's what I know. Let's say I'm always looking to add to my bag of tools, and if there are times when using Nautilus or some other GUI file manager would be better for me, or Joe shell user, I'd like to know what you (all of you) think they might be, so I can try it and decide for myself.
Could we re-cast my previous reply in a different light? "Finding the right picture in a pile of 500? Hey, I do use a GUI for that, it's just Firefox + a photo album, not Nautilus. Any other examples?"
Someone mentioned automatically opening up a shell in the directory that you're looking at in the browser. (I REALLY have wanted that on windows occasionally -- does it exist there?) It occurs to me that it'd be really usefull (for me) if a gui filemanager could put the pathnames of the file(s) I click on in the cut/paste buffer so I can paste them into a shell window, or maybe drag & drop into the shell window. (Usually when I think of a good idea like this, it's already there and I just didn't know about it. Feel free to rub it in if that's the case!)
I'd like to see you select the correct jpeg out of a directory of 500 without an icon preview.
.jpg in a single directory of 500.
That is something I don't do very often, and when I do I use FireFox pointing at my html photo album.
I think what an individual's common activites are may have a lot to bear on this. I'm much more likely to search for a text string in a tree of source code than search for a particular
e.g. emacs [M-x grep-find "what I'm looking for"] which runs "find . -type f -print0 | xargs -0 -e grep -n -e "what I'm looking for". (Is there an easy way to do that in the typical GUI file browser?)
Exactly!
What are these file explorer / desktop things for, anyway? A shell window with cd, ls, tab completion, and wildcards usually gets me where I want to be faster, and when I want to look at the file tree in a more "browsing" fashion, I use dirmode in EMACS.
Now I'll go back and RTFA, but if anyone who uses the tools I mention switches to using Nautilus (or similar) for some particular task they find easier there, I'd love to hear about it. Seriously, if I'm missing something, I want to know.
...I'm really sick and tired of how the Slashdot community (as any internet community would) almost universally reacts to any and all evidence that pornography might be *gasp* a bad thing with a combination of rationalization and equivication ...you're trying to excuse/justify your behavior in the face of overwhelming evidence that pornography - like smoking (as an example) is bad for people and bad for society...
Don't you feel a little silly that you said that without actually offering any of this supposed overwhelming evidence?
I'm the type that has a Treo 650, but my wife is the kind of person that wants a simple phone.
She's got the hang of a built in directory, but notes that now we never can remember people's phone numbers when we don't have our own phone with us.
All her previous phones had monochrome LCD screens. Her latest one is color. But you can't read it in direct sunlight, and she doesn't really care that it's color!
Extra options just make the phone harder to use (more complicated menu system).
Even with my Treo 650, I note that my cheapo digital camera is better than the one in the phone, and I have an ipod because it's a better mp3 player. It's nice to have the phone and palm pilot in one unit, so I keep the calendar with me at all times, but my previous cell phones were actually better at being a phone!
The courts may make them pay monetary damages, and may force them to comply with the GPL, but there are two ways to comply with the GPL: distribute source to your modifications also under the GPL, or don't distribute at all. The company would probably still have the choice between discontinuing their distribution of the GPL code or releasing their modifications. I don't think anyone can limit them to the option of releasing under the GPL.
But, IMHO, it is the teachers fault if they give a passing grade to such a student!
I'm not sure I'd trust the government to write the software.
It is in their best interest to make it easy to file, but it isn't in their best interest to make sure I've found each and every deduction, for my lowest possible tax bill.
If it said "press the space bar to agree," did you ever think maybe you are agreeing to the license any time you use the space bar?
Get serious. All of us here know that getting hacked involves exploiting holes in software that were unknown at the time of release.
A firewall simply helps by limiting the number of services that are exposed to the net at large, by trying to ensure that nobody can pretend to be one of your local, trusted machines, and perhaps by watching for known attacks. No firewall could have kept code red out of a IIS server that was intentionally exposed to the net, at least not unless it was upgraded after the attack was known.
Similarly, having a virus-free, up-to-date Win 98 installation does nothing to protect you from attacks not currently known.
A firewall may protect you from such an attack, if the attack requires, e.g., using a port you haven't opened up to the internet at large. But there is by no means a guarantee.
Reminds me of a M*A*S*H eppisode. "Radar, where did you file the maps to the minefields?" "They're under 'B' for 'Boom'!"
I don't think I'd like to borrow your car under these circumstances. :-)
(Maybe you like it better that way, but what about emergencies?)
Not to be elitist, but I think maybe there will always be differences between what's best for the masses and the desires of "the geeks". The automobile I use for general transportation differs in many ways from both the rigs of semi drivers and the cars on a NASCAR race track. Why aren't they trying to pound everything into a one size fits all scenario?