hate Adobe for their lack of Linux support and hope to see them either shape up or get destroyed by Microsoft.
Did you really just compare Adobe to Microsoft in terms of poor Linux support? If Silverlight becomes workable on Linux, it'll be because a group of hackers reverse-engineered and re-implemented it, not because MS gives a shit about Linux. If you're going to judge these techs by their third-party open-source implementations, then you should be talking about the several free flash players that are currently much more functional than Moonlight.
I don't think this technology has that much to do with social picture networks in particular, I'm not sure using it to index images is all that compelling.
There are pictures on the web of most of the Western world. If you could feed this thing all of Flickr, it would make Google Street View look like a child's toy.
If I read their FAQ right, all they're saying is that the three races from SC1 will be returning. They take care not to exclude the possibility of new races.
I'm not a lawyer, but I'm pretty sure they'd be required to show in court that it actually was their key, and perhaps even that it wasn't your randomly-assigned IPv6 address. DO you have evidence to the contrary?
The odds of that actually being a randomly generated IPv6 address are vanishingly small. The odds are much, much higher, in this context, that you're just using the form of an IP address to disseminate the key, and I think a reasonable court would recognize that and find against you.
If the speed limits are properly set, then it's dangerous for police to exceed them, and patrolling a slightly larger area is no justification for putting people's lives at risk.
Of course, most speed limits are bullshit and can safely be broken, and the police know this and very justifiably break them. The only part of this I have a problem with is that they hypocritically try to enforce them on the rest of us.
Well, traction also plays a role in acceleration times. But the reason this is notable is that it demonstrates that electric cars can achieve the same sort of power-to-weight ratios as gas.
Well, since it's a two-seat roadster, no, it's not a family car. But there's no reason light cars can't be safe - people regularly walk away from 150mph crashes in F1 cars.
It's the same as with all Mac hardware - it's not a bad deal for what you get. However, if what you want isn't exactly what Apple decides to offer, then it's a terrible deal. If all you want is an expandable desktop, Apple has nothing for you except the Mac Pro, which is hugely more expensive then most expandable PC desktops. Yes, you get more, but not everyone wants more.
To go back to the car analogy, say that all I want in a car is that it be sporty and rear-wheel-drive. Someone suggests to me that Honda makes great cars that are actually very good value when you consider what you get. While this is true, Honda's cheapest RWD car is the S2000, which lists around $35,000. That's a lot more expensive than a Miata ($20,000), which also suits my specification. In this case, since Honda doesn't cater to people who want cheap RWD cars, the Mazda is a much better value for my purposes. Similarly, since Apple doesn't cater to people who want cheap expandable computers, the PC is a much better value.
If they compress their message store, then the amount of space used by spam messages (which are presumably duplicated close to identically in thousands of inboxes) drops drastically.
Something which most people don't think about is: if the front end crumples too much, the engine has to go somewhere. It certainly doesn't jump out from under the hood and clear itself from the car. It's not going to deflate into a small piece of rubber. Imagine parking an engine in your passenger area at a pretty good speed and (people) trying to survive. Did you watch Twister and see the tower fly into the truck's front window? That's minor.
Safety. Yet another compelling reason to drive a mid-engined car.
Well, on Slashdot you never know.:-) If you know those algorithms, you know most of what you need to know about big-O notation. Why does selection sort require n^2 comparisons to sort n items? Why does merge sort only require n*log2(n) comparisons? If you can answer those questions, then you can say that selection sort is O(n^2) and merge sort is O(n*log2(n)). You don't need to know the formal mathematical definition of O() as long as you have a working knowledge of what it means and how it's generally used.
Well, there's no reason not to.:-) The basic ideas aren't too hard to learn. A google search will get you a few decent introductions. Probably the best way to start is to consider common sorting algorithms (bubble sort, selection sort, insertion sort, merge sort, quick sort, radix sort) and how many operations they take to sort a dataset. If you don't know how those algorithms work, look them up; it's good stuff to know as well as interesting in its own right.
If you're just programming to make buttons appear on windows, then no actual thought is really necessary, but the ideas behind big-O notation come into play any time you're actually trying program something new and original, and many times even when you're not.
IANAL, but I think the whole idea of limited rights for children is based, like the rest of our legal system, in English common law and precedent. Children are not "people" in the constitutional sense, so they don't inherently receive rights, but there's precedent for extending most legal rights to them as long as there's no good reason not to. Prohibiting cruel and unusual punishment? Sure. Allowing them to buy guns? Probably a bad idea. Free speech is one of the more contentious issues, and the courts are still trying to define sensible limits.
No one said anything about regulating births. The idea is, if you barely have enough money to support yourself, it might not be the best decision to voluntarily add another mouth (or mouths) to feed. If you do choose to take on that burden, realize that no one forced you to and that you shouldn't expect a huge amount of sympathy on that account alone.
Yes, it's a lot easier for rich people to support kids. It's also a lot easier for rich people to do pretty much everything else. Unfortunately, life's not fair.
IANAL, but I don't think you can really "violate" the law in a logical sense. The law says things like "Tax fraud shall be defined as x,y,z,... the penalty for tax fraud is prison." If I'm then caught committing tax fraud and am sent to prison, then we colloquially say that I "violated" the law, but really everything happened completely according to the law. (Criminal) law isn't made up of commandments like "Ye shall not cheat on your taxes", it's just a list of consequences for actions. Causes and effects. If I commit a crime, I'm not "violating" the law, I'm just satisfying its antecedent.
Now, the Constitution says things like "Congress shall make no law... abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press." Again, this isn't a commandment, it's a simple axiom of our society. Congress cannot make a law that abridges free speech. It just doesn't have the power. If a bill that says "anyone criticizing the president shall be executed" is put before Congress, it doesn't matter if the House and Senate unanimously vote for it; it's still just a piece of paper, not a law. Nothing Congress does can "break" the First Amendment. They can claim to have passed the bill, but it has no legal weight.
The problem with what you seem to be advocating - jail time for members of Congress that vote for an unconstitutional bill - is that often things aren't cut and dry. When there's controversy about what Congress has the power to do, the only way to resolve it is for Congress to pass a bill and then let it be challenged in court. If Congress didn't have the authority to pass the bill, then the judge will throw it out. There've been serious debates about the constitutionality of major pieces of legislation - pretty much all federal civil rights legislation, for example, hinges on a pretty broad interpretation of the elastic ("necessary and proper") clause and the interstate commerce clause. If Congressmen supporting civil rights legislation had been faced with the possibility of jail time if the courts went the other way, it would not have been passed.
Re:This whole article is an embarrassment to Slash
on
AppleTV Hits the Streets
·
· Score: 4, Insightful
You can rip any DVDs you happen to own/rent to H.264. You can download pirated HD shows in H.264 (probably a lot more when this becomes more popular). And, probably not too long from now, you'll be able to buy HD shows and movies from the iTunes store.
Compare the cost of your cable bill + netflix account + tivo service to that of just buying episodes of the shows and movies you watch. Maybe it doesn't work out well for you, but there are some people who would do very well with something like this.
Your reasoning overlooks the essential nature of the question: How many legislators does it take to change a light bulb? Not every light bulb in California, just one. Since the population of California is about 34 million, if we assume a 3:1 incandescent-lightbulb-to-person ratio, those 62 legislators would change about 100 million light bulbs. Thus, it takes about 62/100000000 = 0.00000062 legislators to change a light bulb.
Slashdot Mirror
Fair enough about the license, but my understanding is that the Flash format is quite well-documented.
hate Adobe for their lack of Linux support and hope to see them either shape up or get destroyed by Microsoft.
Did you really just compare Adobe to Microsoft in terms of poor Linux support? If Silverlight becomes workable on Linux, it'll be because a group of hackers reverse-engineered and re-implemented it, not because MS gives a shit about Linux. If you're going to judge these techs by their third-party open-source implementations, then you should be talking about the several free flash players that are currently much more functional than Moonlight.
There are pictures on the web of most of the Western world. If you could feed this thing all of Flickr, it would make Google Street View look like a child's toy.
If I read their FAQ right, all they're saying is that the three races from SC1 will be returning. They take care not to exclude the possibility of new races.
I think you've just discovered the purpose of copyright law.
I'm not a lawyer, but I'm pretty sure they'd be required to show in court that it actually was their key, and perhaps even that it wasn't your randomly-assigned IPv6 address. DO you have evidence to the contrary?
The odds of that actually being a randomly generated IPv6 address are vanishingly small. The odds are much, much higher, in this context, that you're just using the form of an IP address to disseminate the key, and I think a reasonable court would recognize that and find against you.
Because the standard interfaces for speakers were finalized before sound cards became common. Also, many headphone users don't have speakers.
Of course, most speed limits are bullshit and can safely be broken, and the police know this and very justifiably break them. The only part of this I have a problem with is that they hypocritically try to enforce them on the rest of us.
You can install five-point harnesses in most sports/sporty cars for a couple hundred dollars. I'll probably do that to my next car.
Well, traction also plays a role in acceleration times. But the reason this is notable is that it demonstrates that electric cars can achieve the same sort of power-to-weight ratios as gas.
Did you ever think of how much pollution and destruction comes from mining all that coal?
Well, since it's a two-seat roadster, no, it's not a family car. But there's no reason light cars can't be safe - people regularly walk away from 150mph crashes in F1 cars.
To go back to the car analogy, say that all I want in a car is that it be sporty and rear-wheel-drive. Someone suggests to me that Honda makes great cars that are actually very good value when you consider what you get. While this is true, Honda's cheapest RWD car is the S2000, which lists around $35,000. That's a lot more expensive than a Miata ($20,000), which also suits my specification. In this case, since Honda doesn't cater to people who want cheap RWD cars, the Mazda is a much better value for my purposes. Similarly, since Apple doesn't cater to people who want cheap expandable computers, the PC is a much better value.
If they compress their message store, then the amount of space used by spam messages (which are presumably duplicated close to identically in thousands of inboxes) drops drastically.
Safety. Yet another compelling reason to drive a mid-engined car.
Well, on Slashdot you never know. :-) If you know those algorithms, you know most of what you need to know about big-O notation. Why does selection sort require n^2 comparisons to sort n items? Why does merge sort only require n*log2(n) comparisons? If you can answer those questions, then you can say that selection sort is O(n^2) and merge sort is O(n*log2(n)). You don't need to know the formal mathematical definition of O() as long as you have a working knowledge of what it means and how it's generally used.
If you're just programming to make buttons appear on windows, then no actual thought is really necessary, but the ideas behind big-O notation come into play any time you're actually trying program something new and original, and many times even when you're not.
IANAL, but I think the whole idea of limited rights for children is based, like the rest of our legal system, in English common law and precedent. Children are not "people" in the constitutional sense, so they don't inherently receive rights, but there's precedent for extending most legal rights to them as long as there's no good reason not to. Prohibiting cruel and unusual punishment? Sure. Allowing them to buy guns? Probably a bad idea. Free speech is one of the more contentious issues, and the courts are still trying to define sensible limits.
The human race is in no imminent danger of extinction; quite the opposite, in fact.
Yes, it's a lot easier for rich people to support kids. It's also a lot easier for rich people to do pretty much everything else. Unfortunately, life's not fair.
Now, the Constitution says things like "Congress shall make no law ... abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press." Again, this isn't a commandment, it's a simple axiom of our society. Congress cannot make a law that abridges free speech. It just doesn't have the power. If a bill that says "anyone criticizing the president shall be executed" is put before Congress, it doesn't matter if the House and Senate unanimously vote for it; it's still just a piece of paper, not a law. Nothing Congress does can "break" the First Amendment. They can claim to have passed the bill, but it has no legal weight.
The problem with what you seem to be advocating - jail time for members of Congress that vote for an unconstitutional bill - is that often things aren't cut and dry. When there's controversy about what Congress has the power to do, the only way to resolve it is for Congress to pass a bill and then let it be challenged in court. If Congress didn't have the authority to pass the bill, then the judge will throw it out. There've been serious debates about the constitutionality of major pieces of legislation - pretty much all federal civil rights legislation, for example, hinges on a pretty broad interpretation of the elastic ("necessary and proper") clause and the interstate commerce clause. If Congressmen supporting civil rights legislation had been faced with the possibility of jail time if the courts went the other way, it would not have been passed.
Compare the cost of your cable bill + netflix account + tivo service to that of just buying episodes of the shows and movies you watch. Maybe it doesn't work out well for you, but there are some people who would do very well with something like this.
Your reasoning overlooks the essential nature of the question: How many legislators does it take to change a light bulb? Not every light bulb in California, just one. Since the population of California is about 34 million, if we assume a 3:1 incandescent-lightbulb-to-person ratio, those 62 legislators would change about 100 million light bulbs. Thus, it takes about 62/100000000 = 0.00000062 legislators to change a light bulb.