NAT's are nice for giving a lot of computers access to the internet, but not good for putting a lot of services on the 'net itself.
This should be emphasized. The internet has an abundance of consumers, but is greatly lacking in producers. We need more people making stuff and making stuff happen.
I've been carrying a Vaio Z505 for about three years now, and have never once been in a situation where I was away from home and needed the optical drive. I just don't install software when I'm working or surfing at a coffee shop.
I've needed to burn CDs or DVDs when I've been out before...not that I'm saying that making it optional would be entirely a bad idea or anything, but I pretty much spend all of my time one one of two powerbooks these days, and I find it nice to have everything inside.
Software Giveaways should be assigned no value in a legal settlement!
This should be emphasized. They're putting large dollar signs on what is effectively a CD duplication process, if even that (you only need one CD per school, right?).
I'm shocked to see this kind of stuff. They do something wrong, and we punish them by forcing our kids to use their products.
Um, I'm a Linux advocate and I will tell you that the software is indeed free. If you disagree, you'll need to provide some proof that Linux is not available for free.
Linux, by itself, does not solve any business problems. You almost always need something custom on top of it, which will cost in one way or another.
...then move to a voting-capable machine with Windows for about ten minutes and cast your ballot. The end.
How much do I pay for this Windows machine for about two and a half minutes a year (on average)? Will MS donate it to me? I don't want to directly or indirectly (taxes) pay for this to happen.
It's simple, really. The OS market is so competitive, and not perfectly so (economically speaking), that it is virtually impossible to develop software that can work on all systems.
Like slashdot?...or just about any other standards-based web site out there? It's certainly not a product of features. Amazon.com has had plenty of features for a large amount of time (one click buy! j/k) and it works just fine with whatever I want to use. I didn't give any money to Microsoft to design my shoes on www.cmax.com.
Why is it that Slashdot cheers any time a UNIX/Linux system is specifically chosen for something, but it pitches the equivalent of a toddler's tantrum when Windows gets the nod? That, my friend, is called discrimination.
Nah, it's just that when I pay for something, I want to have a say in what happens to it. I don't want my tax money making proprietary software at all...or even paying others to make it. When a solution is being provided making use of and extending free software, the money spent benefits us and helps build a larger foundation to provide us further cost savings in the future. When a solution is provided using proprietary software, it may solve that problem, and only helps to build a foundation for the company that solved the problem.
It's similar in the corporate world, but I can't complain about my tax money being spent. When software is chosen for a project, though, there's a lot of politics involved, and that's just sad. I have to imagine that when WinCE is chosen as an embeded system, it's not chosen for technical reasons. There may be a few exceptions, but I don't think people seriously go, ``Hey, I needed an embedded system to operate this device...I know, Windows CE!''
It's sad when people choose the wrong tool for the wrong reasons and costs lots of people lots of money. It's just wrong when it's public money and effort becoming proprietary private property.
No. It's an OS. By your logic even a BIOS would be "special software"
I have many pieces of hardware that I have acquired at no cost that I am legally using without Windows. Windows would make these systems suddenly cost me money, and it is money I have no interest in spending. It's special software in that it's an additional, required component that is unavailable without spending an unreasonably large chunk of money to acquire specifically for voting.
And yes, I do pay for both hardware and software. However, the system from which I'm replying to this also does not (and will not) run Windows. I rather like it that way.
Special software, in my opinion, is software that's above and beyond what I already use for my day-to-day work, reading, banking, etc...
And with layoffs coming every couple of months, I sure as heck don't want to be tech lead on the project that missed its market window because I insisted on perfection.
I got promoted for the same thing you're worried about. I've slowed my department down quite a bit, and at the same time accomplished far more than we've ever accomplished before.
We used to do weekly releases to get features in in a huge rush. Now we do a release about every three months. Things are pretty good.
That's not actually what I was talking about. What I mean is that page forward/page backward should be one (obvious) keystroke, not a command sequence, or anything like that. Also, movements shouldn't be cursor-based. When people hit "down" everything should go down a page. With a cursor-based system (which is pretty much every editor) you can never be sure what's going to happen. A web browser would make a better book-reader than vi (maybe lynx/links?).
Well, it is a keystroke, ^F or page down. Those are both page-based.
I know the feeling... It took me weeks upon weeks, but gradually, you learn new habits, and stop with the old. In many ways my new Dvorak habits are better than my QWERTY habits. The only thing I never got the hang of with Dvorak was the alphabetic direction keys... Mainly because I use the arrow keys instead, but sometimes I login to a terminal set to something odd, and I need to usse them. Then, the process can be a bit slow. That's rather minor though. I'm quite a happy Dvorak user. (check out the typematrix keyboard, dvorak and qwerty-labeled version, and both are hardware switchable between the two layouts)
Yeah, that could be a problem for me. I never use the arrow keys. The alpha keys always work, the arrow keys don't always work, so I just learn the one. I don't actually know what the keys are, though...I just know how to make the cursor go where I want it to go.
The Mac has a keyboard mode that does Dvorak for typing, and qwerty when you hit command, which is cool, but not helpful for vi.
(I prefer nvi to vim BTW, I just find vim to feel very rubbery, and just not very strict or consistent in the way it acts--I can live without vim's color formatting as well, dark colors on a black terminal justs makes a bad situation worse)
I don't think I've used nvi a lot, but I use a *lot* of vim's features nowadays. It started with color coding, but now I've got lots of nice scripts to help me with my programming or just general text writing. Things like learning macros on the fly and reapplying an arbitrarily long sequence of commands (think really-cool . command), build-system awareness (my config knows that if I open a java file, that:make should use ant and will properly handle all errors that it encounters (letting me flip through them and correct them). I also do emacs-style multi-buffer things a lot (open lots of files simultaneously). I can do things like a *really* global search and replace, split screens, use navigation-enhancing scripts (taglist.vim is awesome), etc... vim is an incredible tool for a programmer.
It also understands just about every language. When I'm learning a new programming language (which I try to do a lot), it tends to know more about it than I do. That's pretty helpful for knowing when you're making a stupid mistake or something.
Does it save your position when you move the file to a new location?
Nah, but it'd be easy enough to make a vim macro to take care of this.
Does it have good-looking fonts? (I haven't yet seen a terminal with good fonts)
That's pretty much an opinion. I spend my work days in vim in terminal windows on my Mac and they look fine. Also remember: vim doesn't have to be run in a terminal window.
Does it make it easy to read without having to think much about operating it? (Easy page advance, line wrapping, page seeking)
Absolutely. I don't think about what I'm doing when I'm using vim, I just think about what I want to do (i.e. if I want the next page, I just think that and it happens...).
This is probably the only reason I'm not using a Dvorak keyboard, in fact. I have no idea what most of the keys I use in vim are. My fingers just press them when I want something to happen. I was 100% Dvorak for about a month, and that was the hardest thing for me. Deleting a line is two taps of my middle finger, not ``dd.''
If you sold a lot of your software then it's either really good/easy to use, the best option, you marketed it really well, or more than one of the previous options.
Which one of those makes Amazon's one-click-buy better than everyone else's?
Patents and other legal issues change the way things work quite a bit and can help build monopolies.
I don't know anyone who runs Windows because they like Windows. I know plenty of people who run Windows because they like a particular, or few pieces of software that only run on Windows. The Wine team has made remarkable progress towards making these applications available to people who don't want/otherwise need to give money to Microsoft, but there's still a way to go and they still don't help people who use non-PC hardware.
I realize the linux community hates the idea of actually making a profit off of something
Hey, way to be taken seriously...
even though as you read this, no doubt from IE6, you forget to realize that windows is quite simply a GOOD OS
I've never seen IE6, I don't believe, but based on what I have seen, I can't imagine it's anywhere close to as good as the Mozilla 1.4 I'm using.
I do actually have VirtualPC on my work computer with Windows on it, and I can say that I'm not forgetting to realize anything about it being a good OS. Most of my work is development, but the user experience for just about anything is horrid on the Windows systems I have had to use.
That's personal opinion, of course (like your ``windows is quite simply a GOOD OS'' statement), but if I didn't have guys around me telling me the bizarre stuff I had to go through to get a disk check, I probably never would've got stupid MS Project running on my VPC instance...because although I was given a specific error number, the IT department absolutely would not consider that it might have something to do with the install failure. Since they were deathly afraid to call MS tech support, the only option they gave me was to install it on an entirely different computer from the one on which I actually needed to use it.
But alas, it was a corrupt ``recycle bin'' that prevented the software from installing. How it got corrupt without me ever having used it, who knows, but that's a description of my most recent adventure in Windows...which I would not consider a ``good OS.''
That page gave an example of a bad way to do it. There are also good ways to do it. I'm sure there are many implementations of things similar to my GetPK.
This provides application level sequences in a cluster and bypasses a lot of performance issues. Combined with my hierarchial storage model, it allows us to build out large complex trees of objects where the objects all know the primary keys of all of the objects as they will be if they get stored in the DB. The framework also allows us to ensure the tables get updated in the correct order so the DB can maintain the RI.
Different keys can have different burn rates so keys that get used up quickly can produce no greater performance hit against the DB than keys that are rarely needed.
This does not guarantee that the keys are given out exactly in sequence, but I've rarely seen it necessary.
I produce software that is used internally only. However, our software has been getting pretty good, and there's been a lot of talk selling our software in addition to our service. If your software licensing cannot survive a change in business plans, it's something to consider.
well, GPL, being the most prevalent license for OSS, has become nearly synonimous with Open Source for non-technical people. And is that really so bad?
Yes, it really is that bad. Although you may believe in the ``copyleft'' type restrictions put forth by the GPL, it doesn't fit into a lot of business plans. If people who make those decisions believe that all open source works that way, they're likely to categorically overlook it.
Microsoft never implemented PNG properly, and apparently it is not a pressing need for them. Major sites cannot publish PNG using transparency as a result.
Are you sure about that? As far as I can tell, transparency (ala gif) is handled just fine, it's alpha channels that don't work correctly on some of their IE versions (except for really high color images, they look OK on the Mac at least)
If you're comparing it to gif, though, it seems that png can do everything gif can do (animations excepted) and much more. The fact that some of their features are intentionally cripped by Microsoft is not an excuse to avoid the format altogether.
With the exception of *really* small (i.e. 1 pixel) images, the png will be smaller (unless you want it to be bigger, it can do that, too) and open you up to more capabilities.
Wow, that 1 pixel thing is the first gif I've found that wasn't smaller as a png. I got 49 bytes (in gimp) from the gif, and 101 from the PNG (and no, pngcrush couldn't help).
All Pocket PCs on the market for the past year have had an ARM based processor. They all have 240x320 16K color displays. They all have SD expansion (with a few exceptions). They all have 32M of flash. They all have audio input and output capabilities. They all have a 5-way directional pad and 4 front buttons.
Sounds like my palm (except it's 320x320). Works pretty well with OS X, too.
Wrong. Notice the definition is to "take the property", and not to "take away the property". Everything can be argued if you're going to add extra words to the definition...
Fine, ``Have I taken the property of another if he still has it?'' I don't see the difference between those two statements, but if you think there is one...
Detection has nothing to do with it. Suppose I were to inherit a bag of gold coins, and I did not have the opportunity to calculate how much it's worth. If someone takes a coin from the bag, it would be stealing, even though there's no way I can "detect" the missing gold coin.
I was talking about the ability to detect it which has a distinction. If you take a gold coin from my bag, I have fewer gold coins than I had before (whether or not I know how many I had is not relevant there). If you copy a work I've produced, I still have produced the same number of works and still have as much access to all of them as I had before. The damage you have done is not theft.
Why would we even have copyright infringement as a crime if it was really just theft of property?
You go to the doctor. He saves your life. You stiff him on payment because this does not deprive the doctor of any property.
He spent a tangible amount of time (=money) working on you. He is very aware of the existence of that time and sees it gone.
You go to your broker. He doubles your investment. You stiff him on payment because this does not deprive the broker of any property.
He spent a tangible amount of time (=money) working for you. He is very aware of the existence of that time and sees it gone.
You go to your lawyer. He prevents your ex from taking your house, kids, and savings. You stiff him on payment because this does not deprive the lawyer of any property.
He spent a tangible amount of time (=money) working for you. He is very aware of the existence of that time and sees it gone.
You go to work. You take credit for your friend's good idea and get promoted instead, because this does not deprive your friend of any property.
He spent a tangible amount of time (=money) working on that idea. He is very aware of the existence of that time and sees you receiving the benefits from that work where he is not.
You lift a game off IRC. It gives you pleasure for a week. You justify this because it does not deprive the retailer, wholesaler, publisher, and shareholders of any property.
These people spent no effort on *YOU*, and have no way to tell who you are unless you tell them (or someone else finds them and lets them know they're infringing on your copyright).
In this situation, someone did some work and wants to see the benefits from that work amplified by everyone who comes in contact with the work. If someone comes in contact with the work and they do not receive the benefits from it, they have not lost a resource to that person (i.e. the doctor could've saved someone else's life who'd have paid).
This is copyright infringement. There is no service to steal, and there is no item taken away from the original owner. This is a different crime.
1. To take (the property of another) without right or permission.
Cool, now define ``take'' sufficiently. Have I taken away the property of another if he still has it?
This is a circular argument.
When you pirate, you have acquired the intangible IP of the game company without right or permission. Therefore it's stealing.
But the original owner still has it and the effect on him is such that he can't possibly detect that it was ``stolen.''
I believe this all comes down to opinion, but in mine, if you can't detect that something is missing, it wasn't stolen (or taken, etc...).
Copyright infringement is its own crime. It just doesn't make sense to content consumers, so they use the word ``theft'' so their consumers can relate.
My first thought on this is ``please don't do this to us,'' but in all practicality it can't be done. If you try to make your browser compatible with IE rather than the standards, then you're just promoting the use of IE non-standards. As soon as they start making technological changes (i.e. the ones that require close integration with the underlying operating system), it becomes a bigger issue than ``IE-style rendering.''
Slashdot Mirror
NAT's are nice for giving a lot of computers access to the internet, but not good for putting a lot of services on the 'net itself.
This should be emphasized. The internet has an abundance of consumers, but is greatly lacking in producers. We need more people making stuff and making stuff happen.
I've been carrying a Vaio Z505 for about three years now, and have never once been in a situation where I was away from home and needed the optical drive. I just don't install software when I'm working or surfing at a coffee shop.
I've needed to burn CDs or DVDs when I've been out before...not that I'm saying that making it optional would be entirely a bad idea or anything, but I pretty much spend all of my time one one of two powerbooks these days, and I find it nice to have everything inside.
Software Giveaways should be assigned no value in a legal settlement!
This should be emphasized. They're putting large dollar signs on what is effectively a CD duplication process, if even that (you only need one CD per school, right?).
I'm shocked to see this kind of stuff. They do something wrong, and we punish them by forcing our kids to use their products.
Um, I'm a Linux advocate and I will tell you that the software is indeed free. If you disagree, you'll need to provide some proof that Linux is not available for free.
Linux, by itself, does not solve any business problems. You almost always need something custom on top of it, which will cost in one way or another.
...then move to a voting-capable machine with Windows for about ten minutes and cast your ballot. The end.
...or just about any other standards-based web site out there? It's certainly not a product of features. Amazon.com has had plenty of features for a large amount of time (one click buy! j/k) and it works just fine with whatever I want to use. I didn't give any money to Microsoft to design my shoes on www.cmax.com.
How much do I pay for this Windows machine for about two and a half minutes a year (on average)? Will MS donate it to me? I don't want to directly or indirectly (taxes) pay for this to happen.
It's simple, really. The OS market is so competitive, and not perfectly so (economically speaking), that it is virtually impossible to develop software that can work on all systems.
Like slashdot?
Why is it that Slashdot cheers any time a UNIX/Linux system is specifically chosen for something, but it pitches the equivalent of a toddler's tantrum when Windows gets the nod? That, my friend, is called discrimination.
Nah, it's just that when I pay for something, I want to have a say in what happens to it. I don't want my tax money making proprietary software at all...or even paying others to make it. When a solution is being provided making use of and extending free software, the money spent benefits us and helps build a larger foundation to provide us further cost savings in the future. When a solution is provided using proprietary software, it may solve that problem, and only helps to build a foundation for the company that solved the problem.
It's similar in the corporate world, but I can't complain about my tax money being spent. When software is chosen for a project, though, there's a lot of politics involved, and that's just sad. I have to imagine that when WinCE is chosen as an embeded system, it's not chosen for technical reasons. There may be a few exceptions, but I don't think people seriously go, ``Hey, I needed an embedded system to operate this device...I know, Windows CE!''
It's sad when people choose the wrong tool for the wrong reasons and costs lots of people lots of money. It's just wrong when it's public money and effort becoming proprietary private property.
No. It's an OS. By your logic even a BIOS would be "special software"
I have many pieces of hardware that I have acquired at no cost that I am legally using without Windows. Windows would make these systems suddenly cost me money, and it is money I have no interest in spending. It's special software in that it's an additional, required component that is unavailable without spending an unreasonably large chunk of money to acquire specifically for voting.
And yes, I do pay for both hardware and software. However, the system from which I'm replying to this also does not (and will not) run Windows. I rather like it that way.
Special software, in my opinion, is software that's above and beyond what I already use for my day-to-day work, reading, banking, etc...
And with layoffs coming every couple of months, I sure as heck don't want to be tech lead on the project that missed its market window because I insisted on perfection.
I got promoted for the same thing you're worried about. I've slowed my department down quite a bit, and at the same time accomplished far more than we've ever accomplished before.
We used to do weekly releases to get features in in a huge rush. Now we do a release about every three months. Things are pretty good.
That's not actually what I was talking about. What I mean is that page forward/page backward should be one (obvious) keystroke, not a command sequence, or anything like that. Also, movements shouldn't be cursor-based. When people hit "down" everything should go down a page. With a cursor-based system (which is pretty much every editor) you can never be sure what's going to happen. A web browser would make a better book-reader than vi (maybe lynx/links?).
:make should use ant and will properly handle all errors that it encounters (letting me flip through them and correct them). I also do emacs-style multi-buffer things a lot (open lots of files simultaneously). I can do things like a *really* global search and replace, split screens, use navigation-enhancing scripts (taglist.vim is awesome), etc... vim is an incredible tool for a programmer.
Well, it is a keystroke, ^F or page down. Those are both page-based.
I know the feeling... It took me weeks upon weeks, but gradually, you learn new habits, and stop with the old. In many ways my new Dvorak habits are better than my QWERTY habits. The only thing I never got the hang of with Dvorak was the alphabetic direction keys... Mainly because I use the arrow keys instead, but sometimes I login to a terminal set to something odd, and I need to usse them. Then, the process can be a bit slow. That's rather minor though. I'm quite a happy Dvorak user. (check out the typematrix keyboard, dvorak and qwerty-labeled version, and both are hardware switchable between the two layouts)
Yeah, that could be a problem for me. I never use the arrow keys. The alpha keys always work, the arrow keys don't always work, so I just learn the one. I don't actually know what the keys are, though...I just know how to make the cursor go where I want it to go.
The Mac has a keyboard mode that does Dvorak for typing, and qwerty when you hit command, which is cool, but not helpful for vi.
(I prefer nvi to vim BTW, I just find vim to feel very rubbery, and just not very strict or consistent in the way it acts--I can live without vim's color formatting as well, dark colors on a black terminal justs makes a bad situation worse)
I don't think I've used nvi a lot, but I use a *lot* of vim's features nowadays. It started with color coding, but now I've got lots of nice scripts to help me with my programming or just general text writing. Things like learning macros on the fly and reapplying an arbitrarily long sequence of commands (think really-cool . command), build-system awareness (my config knows that if I open a java file, that
It also understands just about every language. When I'm learning a new programming language (which I try to do a lot), it tends to know more about it than I do. That's pretty helpful for knowing when you're making a stupid mistake or something.
Does it save your position when you move the file to a new location?
Nah, but it'd be easy enough to make a vim macro to take care of this.
Does it have good-looking fonts? (I haven't yet seen a terminal with good fonts)
That's pretty much an opinion. I spend my work days in vim in terminal windows on my Mac and they look fine. Also remember: vim doesn't have to be run in a terminal window.
Does it make it easy to read without having to think much about operating it? (Easy page advance, line wrapping, page seeking)
Absolutely. I don't think about what I'm doing when I'm using vim, I just think about what I want to do (i.e. if I want the next page, I just think that and it happens...).
This is probably the only reason I'm not using a Dvorak keyboard, in fact. I have no idea what most of the keys I use in vim are. My fingers just press them when I want something to happen. I was 100% Dvorak for about a month, and that was the hardest thing for me. Deleting a line is two taps of my middle finger, not ``dd.''
If you sold a lot of your software then it's either really good/easy to use, the best option, you marketed it really well, or more than one of the previous options.
Which one of those makes Amazon's one-click-buy better than everyone else's?
Patents and other legal issues change the way things work quite a bit and can help build monopolies.
I don't know anyone who runs Windows because they like Windows. I know plenty of people who run Windows because they like a particular, or few pieces of software that only run on Windows. The Wine team has made remarkable progress towards making these applications available to people who don't want/otherwise need to give money to Microsoft, but there's still a way to go and they still don't help people who use non-PC hardware.
I realize the linux community hates the idea of actually making a profit off of something
Hey, way to be taken seriously...
even though as you read this, no doubt from IE6, you forget to realize that windows is quite simply a GOOD OS
I've never seen IE6, I don't believe, but based on what I have seen, I can't imagine it's anywhere close to as good as the Mozilla 1.4 I'm using.
I do actually have VirtualPC on my work computer with Windows on it, and I can say that I'm not forgetting to realize anything about it being a good OS. Most of my work is development, but the user experience for just about anything is horrid on the Windows systems I have had to use.
That's personal opinion, of course (like your ``windows is quite simply a GOOD OS'' statement), but if I didn't have guys around me telling me the bizarre stuff I had to go through to get a disk check, I probably never would've got stupid MS Project running on my VPC instance...because although I was given a specific error number, the IT department absolutely would not consider that it might have something to do with the install failure. Since they were deathly afraid to call MS tech support, the only option they gave me was to install it on an entirely different computer from the one on which I actually needed to use it.
But alas, it was a corrupt ``recycle bin'' that prevented the software from installing. How it got corrupt without me ever having used it, who knows, but that's a description of my most recent adventure in Windows...which I would not consider a ``good OS.''
That page gave an example of a bad way to do it. There are also good ways to do it. I'm sure there are many implementations of things similar to my GetPK.
This provides application level sequences in a cluster and bypasses a lot of performance issues. Combined with my hierarchial storage model, it allows us to build out large complex trees of objects where the objects all know the primary keys of all of the objects as they will be if they get stored in the DB. The framework also allows us to ensure the tables get updated in the correct order so the DB can maintain the RI.
Different keys can have different burn rates so keys that get used up quickly can produce no greater performance hit against the DB than keys that are rarely needed.
This does not guarantee that the keys are given out exactly in sequence, but I've rarely seen it necessary.
Ugh, that literally drives me crazy. Literally.
We each only use a small part of Windows.
Some of us smaller than others...
I produce software that is used internally only. However, our software has been getting pretty good, and there's been a lot of talk selling our software in addition to our service. If your software licensing cannot survive a change in business plans, it's something to consider.
well, GPL, being the most prevalent license for OSS, has become nearly synonimous with Open Source for non-technical people. And is that really so bad?
Yes, it really is that bad. Although you may believe in the ``copyleft'' type restrictions put forth by the GPL, it doesn't fit into a lot of business plans. If people who make those decisions believe that all open source works that way, they're likely to categorically overlook it.
NOFX rarely puts a track I don't really like on a CD. Those are the only CDs I've never thought was a waste of money.
Even the ones I don't love right away grow on me pretty quickly.
not sure what Folder Actions are, but they could also be an interesting addition
If folder actions are applescripts that run when files are added or removed from folders (I think that's what they call it), that's available now.
Microsoft never implemented PNG properly, and apparently it is not a pressing need for them. Major sites cannot publish PNG using transparency as a result.
Are you sure about that? As far as I can tell, transparency (ala gif) is handled just fine, it's alpha channels that don't work correctly on some of their IE versions (except for really high color images, they look OK on the Mac at least)
If you're comparing it to gif, though, it seems that png can do everything gif can do (animations excepted) and much more. The fact that some of their features are intentionally cripped by Microsoft is not an excuse to avoid the format altogether.
With the exception of *really* small (i.e. 1 pixel) images, the png will be smaller (unless you want it to be bigger, it can do that, too) and open you up to more capabilities.
Wow, that 1 pixel thing is the first gif I've found that wasn't smaller as a png. I got 49 bytes (in gimp) from the gif, and 101 from the PNG (and no, pngcrush couldn't help).
All Pocket PCs on the market for the past year have had an ARM based processor. They all have 240x320 16K color displays. They all have SD expansion (with a few exceptions). They all have 32M of flash. They all have audio input and output capabilities. They all have a 5-way directional pad and 4 front buttons.
Sounds like my palm (except it's 320x320). Works pretty well with OS X, too.
I'll stick with Palm for now.
Fine, ``Have I taken the property of another if he still has it?'' I don't see the difference between those two statements, but if you think there is one...
Detection has nothing to do with it. Suppose I were to inherit a bag of gold coins, and I did not have the opportunity to calculate how much it's worth. If someone takes a coin from the bag, it would be stealing, even though there's no way I can "detect" the missing gold coin.
I was talking about the ability to detect it which has a distinction. If you take a gold coin from my bag, I have fewer gold coins than I had before (whether or not I know how many I had is not relevant there). If you copy a work I've produced, I still have produced the same number of works and still have as much access to all of them as I had before. The damage you have done is not theft.
Why would we even have copyright infringement as a crime if it was really just theft of property?
You go to the doctor. He saves your life. You stiff him on payment because this does not deprive the doctor of any property.
He spent a tangible amount of time (=money) working on you. He is very aware of the existence of that time and sees it gone.
You go to your broker. He doubles your investment. You stiff him on payment because this does not deprive the broker of any property.
He spent a tangible amount of time (=money) working for you. He is very aware of the existence of that time and sees it gone.
You go to your lawyer. He prevents your ex from taking your house, kids, and savings. You stiff him on payment because this does not deprive the lawyer of any property.
He spent a tangible amount of time (=money) working for you. He is very aware of the existence of that time and sees it gone.
You go to work. You take credit for your friend's good idea and get promoted instead, because this does not deprive your friend of any property.
He spent a tangible amount of time (=money) working on that idea. He is very aware of the existence of that time and sees you receiving the benefits from that work where he is not.
You lift a game off IRC. It gives you pleasure for a week. You justify this because it does not deprive the retailer, wholesaler, publisher, and shareholders of any property.
These people spent no effort on *YOU*, and have no way to tell who you are unless you tell them (or someone else finds them and lets them know they're infringing on your copyright).
In this situation, someone did some work and wants to see the benefits from that work amplified by everyone who comes in contact with the work. If someone comes in contact with the work and they do not receive the benefits from it, they have not lost a resource to that person (i.e. the doctor could've saved someone else's life who'd have paid).
This is copyright infringement. There is no service to steal, and there is no item taken away from the original owner. This is a different crime.
1. To take (the property of another) without right or permission.
Cool, now define ``take'' sufficiently. Have I taken away the property of another if he still has it?
This is a circular argument.
When you pirate, you have acquired the intangible IP of the game company without right or permission. Therefore it's stealing.
But the original owner still has it and the effect on him is such that he can't possibly detect that it was ``stolen.''
I believe this all comes down to opinion, but in mine, if you can't detect that something is missing, it wasn't stolen (or taken, etc...).
Copyright infringement is its own crime. It just doesn't make sense to content consumers, so they use the word ``theft'' so their consumers can relate.
Safari "giving in" to IE-style rendering?
My first thought on this is ``please don't do this to us,'' but in all practicality it can't be done. If you try to make your browser compatible with IE rather than the standards, then you're just promoting the use of IE non-standards. As soon as they start making technological changes (i.e. the ones that require close integration with the underlying operating system), it becomes a bigger issue than ``IE-style rendering.''
I get your point on the 10k thing. That's hard to argue.
I guess I'd just have to see my application running under such a thing.