> The sophomoric smarminess of this comment is second only to the monumental > ignorance of military doctrine and battlefield necessity. No, kiddo, your > anecdotal understanding of these things is flawed.
I was with the 9th Infantry in the Mekong Delta. Where did ypu get your combat experience?
> I thought soldiers were on a battlefield precisely to take as many lives as > they could...
They are usually there to take and hold territory by any means necessary. If the enemy resists somebody gets killed but if they run away or surrender that works too.
They will save some civilian lives, too. The soldiers will send one of these into the room to have a look around instead of throwing a grenade in and then rushing in guns blazing, if only because it's safer for them. They may also sometimes air-drop a few onto a building they've been told is a "terrorist" safe house to make sure it isn't really a child-care center before bombing it.
The executor or administrator of his estate has the right to gain access to his accounts. A court order from the probate court may be required to convince the service providers to cooperate.
No one has invested in them in years. They have floated several "rescue" schemes since they filed fo Ch. 11 bankruptcy last year but all have fallen through at the last minute.
> With any luck, we will soon have an official ruling that SCO does not own much of > anything...
Kimball ruled that SCO does not own the SysV copyrights last year. This trial is about how much of Novell's money SCO pocketed when they sold SysV licenses to Sun and Microsoft without Novell's permission. The case will then go back to the bankruptcy court where Judge Gross will decide what to do about it. Note that this trial is about how much of Novell's money SCO took, not whether or not they did so. The latter has already been decided.
If Kimball awards more than a small fraction of the $37M maximum (likely) it is hard to see how SCO can avoid Ch. 7 liquidation.
> You can dream up endless sets of axioms, things that are so absurd and meaningless with > absolutely no foundation in reality but that still is valid math. This tells me that > axioms are invented, not discovered.
How do you determine that it is "valid math"? Where did you get the rules for doing so? Did you invent them?
> I am hereby inventing a number, j, that is defined as one divided by zero. Henceforth, > you can express any number divided by zero by using this j in your answer. Who knows, > such a thing might actually be useful.
Very useful. You can use it to prove that one equals two.
> The article notes that one difficulty pointed out with the Platonic view is that, if > mathematical ideas exist in some way independent of humans or minds, then human minds > engaged in doing mathematics must somehow be able to connect with this non-physical > state.
That doesn't follow. The math may be embodied in the physical universe in which the human brains are embedded. One need not postulate a non-physical state. The convergence of math and physics tends to support this.
>...what they mean by "reignite" is to turn into a quasar. The way the black hole could > turn into a quasar is for the galaxy to collide with another galaxy.
You didn't RTFA very well. The point is that they have found galaxies whose black holes have reignited without there being any evidence of a collision.
Never trust these combination modem/router/firewalls. Put the thing in bridge mode and run a real router behind it (such as an old pc running Debian or OpenBSD or even an old Cisco).
Slashdot Mirror
> The sophomoric smarminess of this comment is second only to the monumental
> ignorance of military doctrine and battlefield necessity. No, kiddo, your
> anecdotal understanding of these things is flawed.
I was with the 9th Infantry in the Mekong Delta. Where did ypu get your combat experience?
> I thought soldiers were on a battlefield precisely to take as many lives as
> they could...
They are usually there to take and hold territory by any means necessary. If the enemy resists somebody gets killed but if they run away or surrender that works too.
They will save some civilian lives, too. The soldiers will send one of these into the room to have a look around instead of throwing a grenade in and then rushing in guns blazing, if only because it's safer for them. They may also sometimes air-drop a few onto a building they've been told is a "terrorist" safe house to make sure it isn't really a child-care center before bombing it.
> I-wish- the government in the US cared enough about the GPL to have a licensing
> controversy
I don't. I prefer that the government take no interest in the GPL at all.
> A country could pass legislation allowing companies to keep self-developed code
> proprietary even if it uses GPL code in a product.
And another country could file a WTO complaint against them (assuming both are WTO members).
The bots will get it right as often on the first try as on the fifth, but that's irrelevant since every try will come from a different IP.
The executor or administrator of his estate has the right to gain access to his accounts. A court order from the probate court may be required to convince the service providers to cooperate.
> I know this must be hard to understand in the US where there are no sensible squatting
> laws...
Google "adverse possession".
> Squatting serves an important purpose: to force property owners to develop the property.
Why is necessary that all property be "developed"?
> Otherwise all the buying up property for the purpose of speculating on an increase in
> the market would result in widespread homelessness.
You have a defective understanding of economics.
> You're forgetting that this "claimed" IP space has a legit owner who might want to use
> it someday.
So why isn't SF Bay Packet Radio taking any action?
> It'd be an internet turf war of people were simply able to advertise the availability of
> a network they don't own.
Isn't that what is happening here?
No one has invested in them in years. They have floated several "rescue" schemes since they filed fo Ch. 11 bankruptcy last year but all have fallen through at the last minute.
> With any luck, we will soon have an official ruling that SCO does not own much of
> anything...
Kimball ruled that SCO does not own the SysV copyrights last year. This trial is about how much of Novell's money SCO pocketed when they sold SysV licenses to Sun and Microsoft without Novell's permission. The case will then go back to the bankruptcy court where Judge Gross will decide what to do about it. Note that this trial is about how much of Novell's money SCO took, not whether or not they did so. The latter has already been decided.
If Kimball awards more than a small fraction of the $37M maximum (likely) it is hard to see how SCO can avoid Ch. 7 liquidation.
> You can dream up endless sets of axioms, things that are so absurd and meaningless with
> absolutely no foundation in reality but that still is valid math. This tells me that
> axioms are invented, not discovered.
How do you determine that it is "valid math"? Where did you get the rules for doing so? Did you invent them?
> I am hereby inventing a number, j, that is defined as one divided by zero. Henceforth,
> you can express any number divided by zero by using this j in your answer. Who knows,
> such a thing might actually be useful.
Very useful. You can use it to prove that one equals two.
> If it's discovered, we can patent it. If it's invented we can copyright it.
No. If it is invented it can be patented. If it is created it can be copyrighted. If it is discovered it can be neither patented nor copyrighted.
> The article notes that one difficulty pointed out with the Platonic view is that, if
> mathematical ideas exist in some way independent of humans or minds, then human minds
> engaged in doing mathematics must somehow be able to connect with this non-physical
> state.
That doesn't follow. The math may be embodied in the physical universe in which the human brains are embedded. One need not postulate a non-physical state. The convergence of math and physics tends to support this.
> ...whipped cream comes out of the can...
That's "dessert topping" (it may also be a floor wax). Whipped cream does not come in a can.
But U don't want or need to have anything blocked or filtered.
...none of the resulting code will make it into production. Marathon coding sessions produce only crap.
> And Microsoft simply allow a new account to be registered every single minute of the day
> from a single IP address?
No. The spammers control millions of bots. Each new account application is proxied via a different bot.
"Universal Collides With First Sale Dactrine" seems more accurate (and I don't that it will be the First Sale Doctrine that will get dented).
I meant that there is no default password on Ubuntu.
There is no default password.
> ...what they mean by "reignite" is to turn into a quasar. The way the black hole could
> turn into a quasar is for the galaxy to collide with another galaxy.
You didn't RTFA very well. The point is that they have found galaxies whose black holes have reignited without there being any evidence of a collision.
Never trust these combination modem/router/firewalls. Put the thing in bridge mode and run a real router behind it (such as an old pc running Debian or OpenBSD or even an old Cisco).
> It's an honest mistake: if you or I were driving down that road and needed to turn around,
> we would do the exact same thing.
You mean photograph the person's house and yard and put the pictures up on an extremely publicj Web site? Sure. Of course we would.