This is how business works. It is fucking cut-throat, and if you can't get your shit together, afford the lawyers, and sustain an operational model, you fail.
Be that as it may, I'm guessing that PJ will be able to throw this same bone to her imbecile readers for another 4-6 quarters, at least.
We have this story every freaking quarter (and I post the same comment every freaking quarter): 10K's are always written that way, stuffing any imaginable disaster into the text to ward off liability.
For heaven's sake, nerds, if you don't believe me, at least believe Neal Stephenson's lengthy explanation in Cryptonomicon!
Basically, the dispute is whether the "product" you purchase is a chunk of software hand-crafted for you in Redmond or a license generated for you in Nevada. Seems like the "its not stealing its copywrite infringment" crowd ought to be 100% on Microsoft's side on this one, no?
The campaign is described as one to 'force "consumers" to buy what they're told to buy -- corporate "content," as the Big 4 call their formulaic outpourings.
This new editor is really off to a rousing start, with one of the most pointless Ask Slashdot's ever, followed by something that's moronic even by New York Country Lawyer's rather ambitious standards of moron.
Yeah, but I heard some of the wxWidgets developers own iPods and XBoxes, so they're clearly untrustworthy also. It seems to me that the submitter has no choice but to develop his own toolkit and not allow anyone else to use it.
As a pompous audiophile, this does me absolutely no good whatsoever. On the other hand, the crown icon has given me an excellent idea for enhancing the performance of my 24 karat gold speaker cables by encrusting them with gems.
I have no idea how widespread dinosaur name-hopping is (How "widespread" could it be? How many dinosaur systematicists are there out there?) but the study you link (the original is in the current issue of Nature) is absolute garbage. Go to their site and browse through the cases of "plagiarism" -- even the curated entries almost all look legitimate to me. A lot are clearly abstracts that were published once as posters and once as journal articles. Others are multiple papers on different aspects of the same study, and many simply reflect the fact that articles on the same subject share a lot of vocabulary.
If anyone is guilty of misconduct, it's these jackasses publicly accusing specific individuals of plagiarism on such an obviously bogus basis.
...said [Sterling] Ball, who shifted his company to open source software after the raid.
Perhaps a more accurate title would be "After Eight Years, We've Found a Second Person to Put In a Story With Sterling Ball"?
Admittedly, the new guy, who seems to have been knowingly using unlicensed software, isn't the most sympathetic figure, but at least it's a break from extrapolating Sterling Ball to the entire business world.
Whereas with Gtk+ (and GNOME, and XFCE, etc) or EFL (the Enlightenment Foundation Libraries) it's pretty easy to write bindings for other languages, like Perl or C++ or Objective-C (far superior to C++, IMNSHO) or LISP or (insert your favorite language here). That makes GNOME much more egalitarian than KDE.
I find it hard to understand why someone who likes C would then dislike C++ enough to base a toolkit decision on that, especially given the quirky C required for Gtk+, but that aside...
There are, in fact, Qt bindings for C, Objective C, Ruby, Java and many other languages. (QtPython is probably the most widely used.) I'm not sure why you think it's so much more difficult to write bindings for a C++-based API.
The core constituency of these leaders is poor, young men with no options for education or marriage. These are the shock troops that carry out the agenda of these leaders; by themselves these men have no power. Their power is derived from the legions and legions of young people who have absolutely no options.
I think you're conflating terrorist groups with militias, or the two activities within groups that have both.
al-Qaeda's international power (pre-Iraq, anyway) came from a handful of educated operatives sent to Yemen, Kenya and the US. Its foot soldiers were of no interest to anyone outside Afghanistan. Hamas' political power within the PA is based partly on its uneducated gunmen, but its suicide bombing and rocketry arms are staffed by a small number of educated technical types. Same for the al-Aqsa Martyrs brigade. Islamic Jihad doesn't have "legions and legions" of gunsels, but it can hang with Hamas on the terrorism front based on its own techies.
If one could fix the issue of social injustice and lack of opportunities / education I'm willing to bet most of these problems will go away as well.
I'm not sure I follow your last bit of reasoning there. If anything, the fact that groups like al-Qaeda (run by an engineer and a physician) and Hamas (run by a physicist who succeeded a physician) are led by the most educated members of local society tends to argue against poverty and lack of education as key causes of terrorism. Same thing on a country level -- it's Saudi Arabia that exports terrorism, not (for the most part) Yemen.
Improving people's economic prospects and education is a good thing in its own right, and doesn't require any defense. But it's not obviously a solution to this problem.
Alternatively, one might wonder why w4r3z kiddies whose lives, self-importance, and reason for living revolve around stolen Hollywood music and movies feel the need to insist on how horrible said music and movies are, and how they wish that the producers of said music and movies would go out of business leaving the field to the producers of freely-distributable crap in which the w4r3z kiddies don't have the slightest interest.
Apparently there was some sort of 'buzz' about Cloverfield for the past few months. I missed it. That may not be interesting, except I watch 2 to 3 hours of TV a day, spend more time than that on the web, subscribe to several popular (non-technical) magazines, and read a daily newspaper. I don't claim to have my finger on the pulse of pop culture, but I'm not quite ammish.
Mmmm, I don't watch nearly as much television as you do, and I've certainly seen numerous Cloverfield commercials. It's the only recent movie I could have named.
(I do appreciate your link if only for this comment: "No wonder the USA is in utter decline with this state of educational ignorance amongst its' College Graduates.")
Zango, on the other hand, I've never heard of. I'd have guessed it was a new open-source content management system, except that the name isn't bad enough to displace Joomla and Moodle. It needs a second "o".
And as to previous poster's comments, he didn't say that IBM is marketing a product that as a dev env is unusable out of the box.
Sorry, I didn't mean that it's unusable as a development environment out of the box. I was referring to the defense Notes apologists always make that it's supposed to be unusable as groupware out of the box -- this seems to be news to pretty much every company that buys it and thinks it's sold as a usable email client.
6.5 was made back in 2003. Of course it is better. Most of the FUD being spouted is from people using older versions of Notes...
I use R7 at work. It's certainly less horrifically disastrous than previous versions but it's still godawful.
Incidentally, you talk about "made back in 2003" like it was designed to run on the ENIAC! There was no excuse for releasing such a piece of garbage in the era of OS X, KDE 2 and whatever Windows was current then.
... or having to use applications written by people not qualified to write them (mainly because it is as easy to write as VB). Or worse still they spend all that money and only use it for email.
Oh, yeah, this stuff. When you Notes fans convince IBM to market the product as a development environment that's unusable out of the box, not as a polished suite centered around email, we'll stop complaining.
I'm not exactly sure what you mean by "entitled to expect."
I mean it in the context of the original comment: third parties engaging in finger pointing should be pointing at the goofballs who wiped out mailboxes without having a proper backup in place -- not claiming that email is some sort of tempfile that users should expect to disappear without warning.
Legal recourse? IANAL, and I haven't seen the agreement the users accepted, but my guess is that they got $50 more than they're "entitled to" in that sense.
Unlike Charter (who probably uses something not all that different from an mbox file), Google has a global, highly redundant data store that is easier to insert information into than it is to delete from.
And yet they also lost a bunch of accounts a couple of years ago, albeit far fewer than in this case.
I'm sorry, but that's ridiculous. Users are absolutely entitled to expect that their provider doesn't delete their mail with no backups available. That's the whole point of using a webmail service, that Google or whoever takes professional-grade responsibility for your data!
I see no reason why bytes are any more "volatile" in an IMAP file than anywhere else.
I'm accustomed to "X writes something in Y arguing that..." being reported as "Y says..." It takes real journalistic skill, though, to turn what's obviously a point-counterpoint piece into "Motley Fool Writes Off Microsoft".
Internet Explorer would get up to 90%+ of market share leading to the worst period in web browsers' history where innovation was a niche for Opera and IE remixes users.
Putting aside the fact that users who were sufficiently upset by this "worst period in web browsers' history" could always go back to Lynx and Viola...
This seems a bit unfair to kfm and Konqueror, which made web browsing on Unix tolerable while Mozilla was still in shambles, Galeon, which put the first decent browser around the Mozilla engine, and whatever that Mac browser was called... OmniWeb? Plus CyberDog!
Slashdot Mirror
Be that as it may, I'm guessing that PJ will be able to throw this same bone to her imbecile readers for another 4-6 quarters, at least.
We have this story every freaking quarter (and I post the same comment every freaking quarter): 10K's are always written that way, stuffing any imaginable disaster into the text to ward off liability.
For heaven's sake, nerds, if you don't believe me, at least believe Neal Stephenson's lengthy explanation in Cryptonomicon!
Note, though, that you're using "free" the opposite of the way the Free Software Foundation does -- that's why the LGPL is "Lesser".
Basically, the dispute is whether the "product" you purchase is a chunk of software hand-crafted for you in Redmond or a license generated for you in Nevada. Seems like the "its not stealing its copywrite infringment" crowd ought to be 100% on Microsoft's side on this one, no?
This new editor is really off to a rousing start, with one of the most pointless Ask Slashdot's ever, followed by something that's moronic even by New York Country Lawyer's rather ambitious standards of moron.
Yeah, but I heard some of the wxWidgets developers own iPods and XBoxes, so they're clearly untrustworthy also. It seems to me that the submitter has no choice but to develop his own toolkit and not allow anyone else to use it.
It also happens to be 25%, not 26%. But, yeah, that's an absurd statistic.
As a pompous audiophile, this does me absolutely no good whatsoever. On the other hand, the crown icon has given me an excellent idea for enhancing the performance of my 24 karat gold speaker cables by encrusting them with gems.
It seems clear to me that you build a tiger exhibit in a way that doesn't require the tiger's continued good will to keep it inside.
If anyone is guilty of misconduct, it's these jackasses publicly accusing specific individuals of plagiarism on such an obviously bogus basis.
They also have Linux Annoyances for Geeks and Mac Annoyances book. What that says about Linux that specifically geeks are annoyed is unclear.
Perhaps a more accurate title would be "After Eight Years, We've Found a Second Person to Put In a Story With Sterling Ball"?
Admittedly, the new guy, who seems to have been knowingly using unlicensed software, isn't the most sympathetic figure, but at least it's a break from extrapolating Sterling Ball to the entire business world.
I find it hard to understand why someone who likes C would then dislike C++ enough to base a toolkit decision on that, especially given the quirky C required for Gtk+, but that aside...
There are, in fact, Qt bindings for C, Objective C, Ruby, Java and many other languages. (QtPython is probably the most widely used.) I'm not sure why you think it's so much more difficult to write bindings for a C++-based API.
I think you're conflating terrorist groups with militias, or the two activities within groups that have both.
al-Qaeda's international power (pre-Iraq, anyway) came from a handful of educated operatives sent to Yemen, Kenya and the US. Its foot soldiers were of no interest to anyone outside Afghanistan. Hamas' political power within the PA is based partly on its uneducated gunmen, but its suicide bombing and rocketry arms are staffed by a small number of educated technical types. Same for the al-Aqsa Martyrs brigade. Islamic Jihad doesn't have "legions and legions" of gunsels, but it can hang with Hamas on the terrorism front based on its own techies.
I'm not sure I follow your last bit of reasoning there. If anything, the fact that groups like al-Qaeda (run by an engineer and a physician) and Hamas (run by a physicist who succeeded a physician) are led by the most educated members of local society tends to argue against poverty and lack of education as key causes of terrorism. Same thing on a country level -- it's Saudi Arabia that exports terrorism, not (for the most part) Yemen.
Improving people's economic prospects and education is a good thing in its own right, and doesn't require any defense. But it's not obviously a solution to this problem.
Alternatively, one might wonder why w4r3z kiddies whose lives, self-importance, and reason for living revolve around stolen Hollywood music and movies feel the need to insist on how horrible said music and movies are, and how they wish that the producers of said music and movies would go out of business leaving the field to the producers of freely-distributable crap in which the w4r3z kiddies don't have the slightest interest.
Mmmm, I don't watch nearly as much television as you do, and I've certainly seen numerous Cloverfield commercials. It's the only recent movie I could have named.
(I do appreciate your link if only for this comment: "No wonder the USA is in utter decline with this state of educational ignorance amongst its' College Graduates.")
Zango, on the other hand, I've never heard of. I'd have guessed it was a new open-source content management system, except that the name isn't bad enough to displace Joomla and Moodle. It needs a second "o".
Sorry, I didn't mean that it's unusable as a development environment out of the box. I was referring to the defense Notes apologists always make that it's supposed to be unusable as groupware out of the box -- this seems to be news to pretty much every company that buys it and thinks it's sold as a usable email client.
I use R7 at work. It's certainly less horrifically disastrous than previous versions but it's still godawful.
Incidentally, you talk about "made back in 2003" like it was designed to run on the ENIAC! There was no excuse for releasing such a piece of garbage in the era of OS X, KDE 2 and whatever Windows was current then.
Oh, yeah, this stuff. When you Notes fans convince IBM to market the product as a development environment that's unusable out of the box, not as a polished suite centered around email, we'll stop complaining.
I mean it in the context of the original comment: third parties engaging in finger pointing should be pointing at the goofballs who wiped out mailboxes without having a proper backup in place -- not claiming that email is some sort of tempfile that users should expect to disappear without warning.
Legal recourse? IANAL, and I haven't seen the agreement the users accepted, but my guess is that they got $50 more than they're "entitled to" in that sense.
And yet they also lost a bunch of accounts a couple of years ago, albeit far fewer than in this case.
I see no reason why bytes are any more "volatile" in an IMAP file than anywhere else.
Wow, that's a real conundrum! I wonder what the explanation could be?
I'm accustomed to "X writes something in Y arguing that..." being reported as "Y says..." It takes real journalistic skill, though, to turn what's obviously a point-counterpoint piece into "Motley Fool Writes Off Microsoft".
Putting aside the fact that users who were sufficiently upset by this "worst period in web browsers' history" could always go back to Lynx and Viola...
This seems a bit unfair to kfm and Konqueror, which made web browsing on Unix tolerable while Mozilla was still in shambles, Galeon, which put the first decent browser around the Mozilla engine, and whatever that Mac browser was called ... OmniWeb? Plus CyberDog!