In Canada, which has nearly twice the geographic area of the US and a tenth the population
According to the CIA World Factbook Canada does indeed have about tenth the population, but it is not nearly twice the area of the US. Canada is only slightly larger than the US:
'Be sure to read the EULA first' as if the EULA on this patch is somehow different than the EULA on the original Windows or any other patch that has come out for it
MS has shown that they are willing to change the EULA whenever it suits them. Im sure there are more cases, but heres one I found in 5 minutes of searching.
Why not read the EULA? See what, if anything, has changed. It seems irresponisble to not read the eula; to not see if you are handing over further power (that may not be in your best interest) to MS.
Its marked experimental because it has race conditions. Heres a quote from this LWN article:
The most common answer to this problem seems to be supermount...
There is also evidently a need for an audit by a serious filesystem hacker to deal with some questionable practices and race conditions.
You can find more referencing to the race conditions in Supermount here.
Other people have nitpicked at other parts of your post, so I wont bother repeating what they have already said.. but what if they simply do not want to communicate with us? Maybe it would be more interesting to watch how we develop. Or maybe they think we are a bit to primitive (maybe something like the Prime Directive for instance).
There are a number of possibilities between them dieing off before reaching us, and us being alone.
That idea would be seriously flawed. Convience usually means lax security. A password as a method of authorizing payment would be incredibly insecure. Most people cant pick out a good password - most people will use the same password for all their accounts. Most people will pick something stupid like their brithday as their password. These passwords would be broken in minutes and those people would have all their information available for anyone to take. Your idea would raise the number of fradulent transactions dramtically.
I also do not see what this has to do with DRM. What exactly is your point (with regard to this story)?
Did the submitter even read the workshop announcement? From the announcement:
DATES: This workshop will be held on July 17, 2002, from 1 p.m.-4 p.m.
ADDRESSES: The workshop will be held at the Herbert C. Hoover Building, 1401 Constitution Avenue, NW., Room 4830, Washington, DC. Entrance on 14th between Pennsylvania and Constitution Aves., NW.
I disagree. From my own experiences, Windows takes longer than *nix. Having to click through multiple levels of menus just to change one settings is not quicker than editing a text file.
Consider the simple task of browsing through your file system. Lets say you want get to C:\Windows\System\DirectX. In Windows I can: Click on My Computer Click on C Find and Click on Windows Find and Click on System Find and Click on DirectX
Or (if *nix had these directories) I could: Type cd/Windows/System/DirectX
Doing that simple task in Windows is going to require many times the amount of time it takes in *nix.
It is true that Linux is only free if your time is worth nothing. But it is also true for any other operating system and it is also true for most anything else you do. Consider the following: Sleep is only free if your time is worth nothing - Or: Reading Slashdot is free if your time is worth nothing.
Personally, I think the solution is to have no secrets.... If the law was that there are no secrets...
So your idea is to get rid of privacy altogether? I certainly wouldnt want to live in such a country where no one has any secrets or privacy. That would be one huge step toward a 1984ish world.
How would you enforce such a law? Would you watch the populace constantly? Would you deploy a ThoughtPolice? Or would you simply rely on everyone to make their secrets public?
Asking everyone to make their secrets public wouldnt change anything. The people who really have something to hide obviously wouldnt comply - and those who do comply would only have that used against them.
Watching the populaces every move (even in their own homes), would be a huge invasion of privacy. Furthermore, it would not uncover everyones secrets. This would be a huge disappointment in the name of freedom - it would be Big Brother run amuck. The same goes if you were to deploy the ThoughtPolice.
There is no way to enforce such a wild idea, and it could only result in further abuse of power by the goverment.
I know not what course others may take, but as for me, give me liberty or give me death! - Patrick Henry , March 1775
"Too many people are only willing to defend rights that are personally important to them. It's selfish ignorance, and it's exactly why totalitarian governments are able to get away with trampling on people. Freedom does not mean freedom just for the things I think I should be able to do. Freedom is for all of us. If people will not speak up for other people's rights, there will come a day when they will lose their own." - Tony Lawrence 12/28/95
"In Germany they first came for the Communists, and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a Communist. Then they came for the Jews, and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a Jew. Then they came for the trade unionists, and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a trade unionist. Then they came for the Catholics, and I didn't speak up because I was a protestant. Then they came for me, and by that time there was nobody left to speak up." - Reverend Martin Niemoller, Germany, 1930's
"He that would make his own liberty secure, must guard even his enemy from oppression; for if he violates this duty, he establishes a precedent which will reach to himself." - Thomas Paine (1737-1809), Dissertation on First Principles of Government, 1795
"The history of liberty is a history of resistance. The history of liberty is a history of limitations of governmental power, not the increase of it." - Woodrow Wilson Speech in New York, September 9, 1912
"The trouble with fighting for human freedom is that one spends most of one's time defending scoundrels. For it is against scoundrels that oppressive laws are first aimed, and oppression must be stopped at the beginning if it is to be stopped at all." - H. L. Mencken
"Our Constitution was not written in the sands to be washed away by each wave of new judges blown in by each successive political wind." - Hugo L Black, Associate Justice, US Supreme Court.
Here are some other quotes, not necessarily about freedom...
"A patriot must always be ready to defend his country against his government." - Edward Abbey
"'Politics' is made up of two words, 'poli,' which is Greek for 'many,' and 'tics,' which are blood-sucking insects." - Gore Vidal
"Every decent man is ashamed of the government he lives under." - H.L. Mencken
"Suppose your were an idiot and suppose you were a member of Congress... But I repeat myself." - Mark Twain
"The short memories of American voters is what keeps our politicians in office." - Will Rogers
"We learn from history that we do not learn from history." - Georg Wilhelm Hegel
Ill second that. I built my first system last year, and I tried to find the cheapest parts. I ended up buying another case and MB becasue the cheap ones I got were crap.
The MB (a PC Chips board) caused me to loose my data because it would detect the size of the HD differently each time you booted. Cost: 65 + SH.
The case had problems with air flow and caused the system to constantly over heat. Cost: 40 + SH.
So altogether, I lost more than $100 dollars than I had to, not including shipping and my time.
Also read reviews on the parts before you buy the more expensive parts (MB, Vid card, etc). There are way to many pieces of crap out there.
You could also ask, what is the business reason for working on Mozilla and keeping around Netscape?
MS is a threat to AOL - MS has a competeing product for everthing AOL has (AFAIK).
None-the-less, I agree with you that AOL may not want to spend all the money which would be needed to pull off the switch to Mozilla. AOL has already spent the money on Mozilla, and after AOL-Time-Warners stock plunge, I wouldnt be surpirsed if they simply cut their losses.
I dont doubt that RH will do the right thing while they can.. but you have to wonder what they will do if they ever have financial problems. What will they do if they are on the brink of collapsing? At that point, they really wouldnt have anything to lose - surely they will try to get as much money as they can while they can - and damn the consequences.
Let me be the third person so far to say MyRealBox. Ive been using their email service for a while (probably almost 2 years). It's run by Novel to demonstrate their email server. 10MB of space, IMAP/POP, SMTP, www interface, SSL support, no ads, very little spam.
They have 140000+ users, but they say they havent spent a dime on advertising.
The BSD license allows anyone to use code under it in free or commercial software, which means that the original author is able to reuse that any code that he/she submitted under the license at any future date for another software product (whether it be free or commercial).
The author can reuse their code no matter what license they place it under. The author can change the license at any time, or license it to another party under different terms (for example). Copyright allows them to do this - dont forget the author still owns the copyright on the code.
Furthermore, it would be ridiculous to expect any author to write completely new code for every project. Whether or not they cut-and-paste, the author will reuse code. Authors typically will program the same way and they will solve the same problem the same way. Alot of the time, the code to solve a problem will be remarkingly similar, if not verbatim, to the code they used to solve a similar problem in the past. So using your argument, the author would have to release _every_ program they write under the same license.
George W. Bush and the Republicans recieved $449,600 from _just_ Microsoft. I don't think there are to many people who wouldn't be against government intervention or who wouldn't be for letting MS off the hook for that much money.
why couldnt IE itself display the source? This would actually be less work than IE does for rendering a page... IE could just display it like a text document - just dont interpret any of the HTML tags. Granted, this may not be as easy as using an editor to do the work, but it would take very little work to make IE work this way.
Maybe the view source menu item is actually just a link to a URL of the form "source:(URL)". IE would see the "source:" part of the line, and then a simple "if" statement could decide to display it as text. For example:
if(strncmp(url, "source:", 7) == 0) {
/* Dont interpret HTML, just render as text */
} else { /* Display as html - Display normally*/
}
US workers have been working even more than Japaneese workers. The average US worker has put in more work hours than any other industrialized nation.
The US worker does not however put in the most hours if you include developing countries. The US worker is only third overall - only being beaten by South Korea and the Czech Republic.
The average US worker logged 1,978 hours in 2000. The Koreans logged almost 500 more hours, and the Czechs logged 100+ more hours.
This reminds me of something I read in a game called "fortune" which is full of (sometimes funny) quotes:
The temperature of Heaven can be rather accurately computed from available data. Our authority is Isaiah 30:26, "Moreover, the light of the Moon shall be as the light of the Sun and the light of the Sun shall be sevenfold, as the light of seven days." Thus Heaven receives from the Moon as much radiation as we do from the Sun, and in addition seven times seven (49) times as much as the Earth does from the Sun, or fifty times in all. The light we receive from the Moon is one ten-thousandth of the light we receive from the Sun, so we can ignore that. With these data we can compute the temperature of Heaven. The radiation falling on Heaven will heat it to the point where the heat lost by radiation is just equal to the heat received by radiation, i.e., Heaven loses fifty times as much heat as the Earth by radiation. Using the Stefan-Boltzmann law for radiation, (H/E)^4 = 50, where E is the absolute temperature of the earth (-300K), gives H as 798K (525C). The exact temperature of Hell cannot be computed, but it must be less than 444.6C, the temperature at which brimstone or sulphur changes from a liquid to a gas. Revelations 21:8 says "But the fearful, and unbelieving... shall have their part in the lake which burneth with fire and brimstone." A lake of molten brimstone means that its temperature must be at or below the boiling point, or 444.6C (Above this point it would be a vapor, not a lake.) We have, then, that Heaven, at 525C is hotter than Hell at 445C.
I think I found the article here. The article is kinda short, but heres a quick quote...
The plaintiffs cite several examples of poor treatment, including the case of Asif-ur-Rehman Saffi, a native of Pakistan, who was arrested at La Guardia Airport in New York on Sept. 30 after his tourist visa expired.
Although an immigration judge ordered him to be deported, the lawsuit alleges he was jailed until March and locked in an isolation unit. Guards allegedly subjected him to strip searches and "severe beatings to the point of unconsciousness," the suit said.
lol... Have you looked at their site? No mention of ACID compliance, and from their 'features' list, it has lower limitations than PostgreSQL.
In case you don't know what ACID means:
A: Atomicity
C: Consistency
I: Isolation
D: Durability
1. Atomicity is an all-or-none proposition.
Suppose you define a transaction that contains an UPDATE, an INSERT, and a DELETE statement. With atomicity, these statements are treated as a single unit, and thanks to consistency (the C in ACID) there are only two possible outcomes: either they all change the database or none of them do. This is important in situations like bank transactions where transferring money between accounts could result in disaster if the server were to go down after a DELETE statement but before the corresponding INSERT statement.
2. Consistency guarantees that a transaction never leaves your database in a half-finished state.
If one part of the transaction fails, all of the pending changes are rolled back, leaving the database as it was before you initiated the transaction. For instance, when you delete a customer record, you should also delete all of that customer's records from associated tables (such as invoices and line items). A properly configured database wouldn't let you delete the customer record, if that meant leaving its invoices, and other associated records stranded.
3. Isolation keeps transactions separated from each other until they're finished.
Transaction isolation is generally configurable in a variety of modes. For example, in one mode, a transaction blocks until the other transaction finishes. In a different mode, a transaction sees obsolete data (from the state the database was in before the previous transaction started). Suppose a user deletes a customer, and before the customer's invoices are deleted, a second user updates one of those invoices. In a blocking transaction scenario, the second user would have to wait for the first user's deletions to complete before issuing the update. The second user would then find out that the customer had been deleted, which is much better than losing changes without knowing about it.
4. Durability guarantees that the database will keep track of pending changes in such a way that the server can recover from an abnormal termination.
Hence, even if the database server is unplugged in the middle of a transaction, it will return to a consistent state when it's restarted. The database handles this by storing uncommitted transactions in a transaction log. By virtue of consistency (explained above), a partially completed transaction won't be written to the database in the event of an abnormal termination. However, when the database is restarted after such a termination, it examines the transaction log for completed transactions that had not been committed, and applies them.
Slashdot Mirror
According to the CIA World Factbook Canada does indeed have about tenth the population, but it is not nearly twice the area of the US. Canada is only slightly larger than the US:
Canada: 9,976,140 sq km
US: 9,629,091 sq km
References: CIA pages of the US and Canada.
MS has shown that they are willing to change the EULA whenever it suits them. Im sure there are more cases, but heres one I found in 5 minutes of searching.
Why not read the EULA? See what, if anything, has changed. It seems irresponisble to not read the eula; to not see if you are handing over further power (that may not be in your best interest) to MS.
And I dont have to worry about if the program included an uninstaller or my (non-existant) registry getting corupted.
Other people have nitpicked at other parts of your post, so I wont bother repeating what they have already said.. but what if they simply do not want to communicate with us? Maybe it would be more interesting to watch how we develop. Or maybe they think we are a bit to primitive (maybe something like the Prime Directive for instance).
There are a number of possibilities between them dieing off before reaching us, and us being alone.
hehe.. sorry. I guess I should have read the entire thing before replying.
That idea would be seriously flawed. Convience usually means lax security. A password as a method of authorizing payment would be incredibly insecure. Most people cant pick out a good password - most people will use the same password for all their accounts. Most people will pick something stupid like their brithday as their password. These passwords would be broken in minutes and those people would have all their information available for anyone to take. Your idea would raise the number of fradulent transactions dramtically.
I also do not see what this has to do with DRM. What exactly is your point (with regard to this story)?
I disagree. From my own experiences, Windows takes longer than *nix. Having to click through multiple levels of menus just to change one settings is not quicker than editing a text file.
/Windows/System/DirectX
Consider the simple task of browsing through your file system. Lets say you want get to C:\Windows\System\DirectX. In Windows I can:
Click on My Computer
Click on C
Find and Click on Windows
Find and Click on System
Find and Click on DirectX
Or (if *nix had these directories) I could:
Type cd
Doing that simple task in Windows is going to require many times the amount of time it takes in *nix.
It is true that Linux is only free if your time is worth nothing. But it is also true for any other operating system and it is also true for most anything else you do. Consider the following: Sleep is only free if your time is worth nothing - Or: Reading Slashdot is free if your time is worth nothing.
So your idea is to get rid of privacy altogether? I certainly wouldnt want to live in such a country where no one has any secrets or privacy. That would be one huge step toward a 1984ish world.
How would you enforce such a law? Would you watch the populace constantly? Would you deploy a ThoughtPolice? Or would you simply rely on everyone to make their secrets public?
Asking everyone to make their secrets public wouldnt change anything. The people who really have something to hide obviously wouldnt comply - and those who do comply would only have that used against them.
Watching the populaces every move (even in their own homes), would be a huge invasion of privacy. Furthermore, it would not uncover everyones secrets. This would be a huge disappointment in the name of freedom - it would be Big Brother run amuck. The same goes if you were to deploy the ThoughtPolice.
There is no way to enforce such a wild idea, and it could only result in further abuse of power by the goverment.
Here are a few interesting ones:
Here are some other quotes, not necessarily about freedom...
Ill second that. I built my first system last year, and I tried to find the cheapest parts. I ended up buying another case and MB becasue the cheap ones I got were crap.
The MB (a PC Chips board) caused me to loose my data because it would detect the size of the HD differently each time you booted. Cost: 65 + SH.
The case had problems with air flow and caused the system to constantly over heat. Cost: 40 + SH.
So altogether, I lost more than $100 dollars than I had to, not including shipping and my time.
Also read reviews on the parts before you buy the more expensive parts (MB, Vid card, etc). There are way to many pieces of crap out there.
You could also ask, what is the business reason for working on Mozilla and keeping around Netscape?
MS is a threat to AOL - MS has a competeing product for everthing AOL has (AFAIK).
None-the-less, I agree with you that AOL may not want to spend all the money which would be needed to pull off the switch to Mozilla. AOL has already spent the money on Mozilla, and after AOL-Time-Warners stock plunge, I wouldnt be surpirsed if they simply cut their losses.
I dont doubt that RH will do the right thing while they can.. but you have to wonder what they will do if they ever have financial problems. What will they do if they are on the brink of collapsing? At that point, they really wouldnt have anything to lose - surely they will try to get as much money as they can while they can - and damn the consequences.
Let me be the third person so far to say MyRealBox. Ive been using their email service for a while (probably almost 2 years). It's run by Novel to demonstrate their email server. 10MB of space, IMAP/POP, SMTP, www interface, SSL support, no ads, very little spam.
They have 140000+ users, but they say they havent spent a dime on advertising.
The author can reuse their code no matter what license they place it under. The author can change the license at any time, or license it to another party under different terms (for example). Copyright allows them to do this - dont forget the author still owns the copyright on the code.
Furthermore, it would be ridiculous to expect any author to write completely new code for every project. Whether or not they cut-and-paste, the author will reuse code. Authors typically will program the same way and they will solve the same problem the same way. Alot of the time, the code to solve a problem will be remarkingly similar, if not verbatim, to the code they used to solve a similar problem in the past. So using your argument, the author would have to release _every_ program they write under the same license.
Your argument is complete nonsense.
Im sure that all the money MS gave to the Republicans didn't have anything to do with it. See my other post.
References: CNet - Election 2000: High-Tech Politics
Maybe the view source menu item is actually just a link to a URL of the form "source:(URL)". IE would see the "source:" part of the line, and then a simple "if" statement could decide to display it as text. For example:
Why wouldnt that be possible?The US worker does not however put in the most hours if you include developing countries. The US worker is only third overall - only being beaten by South Korea and the Czech Republic.
The average US worker logged 1,978 hours in 2000. The Koreans logged almost 500 more hours, and the Czechs logged 100+ more hours.
References: CNN - Study: US workers put in the most hours (Aug 31, 2001)
Ive seen FBSD crash... It was while it was shutting down; didnt cause any problems and I havent seen it since.
Other than that, I havent seen it crash in more than 2 years.
In case you don't know what ACID means:
A: Atomicity
C: Consistency
I: Isolation
D: Durability
1. Atomicity is an all-or-none proposition. Suppose you define a transaction that contains an UPDATE, an INSERT, and a DELETE statement. With atomicity, these statements are treated as a single unit, and thanks to consistency (the C in ACID) there are only two possible outcomes: either they all change the database or none of them do. This is important in situations like bank transactions where transferring money between accounts could result in disaster if the server were to go down after a DELETE statement but before the corresponding INSERT statement.
2. Consistency guarantees that a transaction never leaves your database in a half-finished state. If one part of the transaction fails, all of the pending changes are rolled back, leaving the database as it was before you initiated the transaction. For instance, when you delete a customer record, you should also delete all of that customer's records from associated tables (such as invoices and line items). A properly configured database wouldn't let you delete the customer record, if that meant leaving its invoices, and other associated records stranded.
3. Isolation keeps transactions separated from each other until they're finished. Transaction isolation is generally configurable in a variety of modes. For example, in one mode, a transaction blocks until the other transaction finishes. In a different mode, a transaction sees obsolete data (from the state the database was in before the previous transaction started). Suppose a user deletes a customer, and before the customer's invoices are deleted, a second user updates one of those invoices. In a blocking transaction scenario, the second user would have to wait for the first user's deletions to complete before issuing the update. The second user would then find out that the customer had been deleted, which is much better than losing changes without knowing about it.
4. Durability guarantees that the database will keep track of pending changes in such a way that the server can recover from an abnormal termination. Hence, even if the database server is unplugged in the middle of a transaction, it will return to a consistent state when it's restarted. The database handles this by storing uncommitted transactions in a transaction log. By virtue of consistency (explained above), a partially completed transaction won't be written to the database in the event of an abnormal termination. However, when the database is restarted after such a termination, it examines the transaction log for completed transactions that had not been committed, and applies them.
(Some parts copied from here .)