The Army had to solve this problem eons ago in order to have rotating guard and staff duty schedules. Thier solution is the DA Form-6. Look it up. It has all the features you specified.
Those who would exploit it for ill already have the data,
Those with the ability to fix the problems with the infrastructure should be happy to have this data. They should be willing to use it to correct whatever problems it shows.
But in the article, I didn't see any CEOs or government officials express such willingness. Thier reactions where to classify or hide the info. Nobody said anything about trying to fix problems.
I guess it depends on what you're flying. If you plan to fly something like an Airbus the most realism would be gained by haveing a left-handed joystick *without* force feedback.
If you are flying any other plane though, I think your money will be better spent on a yoke. You can easily pick one up for less than what you're willing to pay for two FF joysticks.
Re:This will be another solid update
on
Jaguar is Over
·
· Score: 1, Troll
Where do you see Microsoft forcing people to upgrade???
They do it by making new versions of software incompatible with older versions and refusing to sell the older versions. That means that if you have a company happily using, say, Office 97 and you need to buy some new computers, you have no choice but to get Office XP (or.NET or whatever it is these days). When you do that, you'll start having compatibility issues with the older stuff (office 97). The easy answer is to buy more copies of office 97 for the newer computers. I mean, if it has the features you want you should be able to buy it. But MS will not sell you licenses for it at any price. So, if you want to be productive, you have no choice but to upgrade everything to the latest version.
I would like to hear of a more successful system anywhere in the world.
I predict that you will not recieve a response to this point. It's a good point, but it will be ignored.
What SCO is really afraid of.
on
My Visit to SCO
·
· Score: 5, Interesting
"[SCO] said that until the parties go to court, it doesn't want the Linux community to remove the code in question. SCO thinks it's more than changing a few lines of code."
I'd bet a all the money I have that if that "offending" code was revealed tonight we'd have it all rewritten by Monday morning. The Linux community is more angry about this than anything that has ever touched it. All that anger would be unleached in an orgy of coding the likes of which even God has not seen.
SCO is afraid the reason for thier lawsuit will vanish is they reveal their hand.
"[SCO] feels large chunks are derivative. It argued that even a full replacement would be in part based on the prior effort, and thus would itself be derivative, at least under the terms of the IBM contract."
Sorry. no. It'd be easy to get around this. You tell me what code infriges and I'll post the input and expected output from that code (without even revealing where the code is). Any programmer who independently writes code that meets those requirements has NOT infringed SCO's licences.
I find it rather hard to believe that Knuth's analysis of algorithms of Sorting and Searching have/will become out dated.
It's too bad that you mentioned searching and sorting because it seems a lot of the other replies here jumped on that issue and completely missed your point.
The Art of Programming isn't about either of those topics. It's about algorithms. Knuth uses seaching and sorting as a means to the ends of teaching the programmer to think about his algorithms. As other people have pointed out, a modern programmer is unlikely to implement either a search algorithm or a sort algorithm. But they use other algorithms to every day. They invent algorithms every day.
The core of programming is ability to examine a problem and create algorithms to solve it. That's what programmers do (unless of course we're talking about VB programmers doing little more than connecting an interface to a control). At any rate, Knuth teaches algorithms - not searching and not sorting.
The bottom line is, Knuth's work is still relevant and quite useful.
Well, a good place to start defining them might be their website (nsa.gov). but I guess the website is just a front for the conspiracy. right?
You still haven't responded to the question I asked about the NSA's distribution of Linux. It's right there on their homepage. You can download it and look at the source code yourself - to check for any nasty trojans. How does your theory that the NSA wants to destroy Linux fit with the fact that the NSA gives away Linux??
You'll have to provide a link to the story about the German email routing problem. I searched google but couldn't find anything (maybe google is a part of the conspiracy!). Would I be out of line to suggest that the servers in Germany were misconfigured by poorly trained admins?
would you agree that walking on public streets is also a priviledge? How about breathing the public air? Can you list for me all of the rights that I have that the government cannot take away? I suspect that all of them except sitting quietly and thinking to myself will involve something that could be said to be public property.
Doesn't the mere fact that they were manipulating the matrix to do what they wanted it to do qualify as a hack?
In the same sence that scaring the birds in the park qualifies as manipulation. It's not the same thing as breaking through the security of the matrix itself. If you could do that, turning off the power to a few city blocks would be small fries.
I just want to point at that at no time during the movie did anyone "hack" the Matrix. Sure, Trinity is shown breaking into an unsecure computer while inside the Matrix, but that's really not the same thing.
I'm no lawyer, but I think the RIAA would argue: a. you are only entitled to the fair market price for your work. So, they'd pay you $0.99 or something. b. a machine (spider) bypassed the click through so they were not bound by it. Now that they are aware of the EULA they elect not to agree and promise to delete all copies of your work.
or the judge will throw out a 1billion dollar claim as just plain stupid. Now, if your click-through set the price at $5 per song you might get away with this. You'd just need 1000's of songs see any real money.
From the article: Mystro TV decides which programs can be recorded and whether ads can be skipped.
I'm trying to picture them asking advertisers if it's ok to allow viewers to skip their ads. "Oh, sure" they'll say "we don't mind if they skip this ad we paid a megabuck for"
That's not likely to happen. So basically, every ad will be skip-protected and this device will actually be worse than an old fashioned VCR.
I'm no lawyer, but I think it's ok to copy content from a news or opinion site as long as you cite your source. In other words, I *think* you're on solid ground if you copy the entire text of a news article and append the date and the place you copied it from.
There are a couple of reasons why an author might have a problem with you doing this: Firstly, if you draw customers (and therefore ad revenue) away from their site, they wont like it. So, what I suggest is that, at the time you open a discussion thread, you cache the article but don't link to your cache at that time. Link to the original. Later on, if the article becomes unavailable, you can add a link to the cache (I'd keep the original link too though).
Secondly, if you surround the cached copy with content from your own site - if you put your own banner ads at the top or your site's menus along the sides etc. - if you do that, you make it seem like the author wrote the article for you, or gave you permission to publish it. You make it seem like you have some relationship with the author and that just isn't true. So, I'd suggest that the cached copy open in its own window and contain nothing but the article text.
I think these two suggestions are just common courtesy and journalistic integrity.
If the author still demands that the cached content be removed, I think you should take it down. In its place, you could put a report or review of the article. You can't copy directly from the article as that's plagiarism. But you can quote the important lines and cite it. Think of it as your own journalistic report. If they still have a problem with that, you should tell them "the content of my site accurately reflects my opinions regarding an article you published and constitutes fair use of that article." If they persist beyond that - get a lawyer and counter sue for harassment.
Slashdot Mirror
DA Form 6 form does not answer his question on HOW to allocate the schedule.
Yes it does. The HOW is the accompanying regulation. See redleg's post below.
It is just a pre-printed sheet to write down a schedule once it has been established.
no it's not. The regulation - the HOW - is part of it.
Leave it to the government to turn what is essentially a sheet of lined paper in to a formal, named and itemized military-spec piece of equipment.
It's clear to me that you have no clue what you're talking about.
How much you think a pad of those costs?
$0. Your cynicism really doesn't add anything to the conversation. Thanks anyway.
You make a good point. too bad I dont' have mod now
The Army had to solve this problem eons ago in order to have rotating guard and staff duty schedules. Thier solution is the DA Form-6. Look it up. It has all the features you specified.
DMCA is not only about "copyright control" it is about "access control" (think CSS
wrong.
The DMCA is about copyright control.
CCA was about access control.
In order to apply the DMCA to DeCSS the MPAA had to argue (lie actually) that CCA was about copyright control also.
The DMCA is about copyright control.
so, an RFID tag effectively controls copywright? Really? because otherwise I don't see how the DMCA applies here.
Those who would exploit it for ill already have the data,
Those with the ability to fix the problems with the infrastructure should be happy to have this data. They should be willing to use it to correct whatever problems it shows.
But in the article, I didn't see any CEOs or government officials express such willingness. Thier reactions where to classify or hide the info. Nobody said anything about trying to fix problems.
I find that very telling.
aerojad, your history teacher is on the phone. She want's to speak to you and she sounds really upset.
I guess it depends on what you're flying. If you plan to fly something like an Airbus the most realism would be gained by haveing a left-handed joystick *without* force feedback.
If you are flying any other plane though, I think your money will be better spent on a yoke. You can easily pick one up for less than what you're willing to pay for two FF joysticks.
Where do you see Microsoft forcing people to upgrade???
.NET or whatever it is these days). When you do that, you'll start having compatibility issues with the older stuff (office 97). The easy answer is to buy more copies of office 97 for the newer computers. I mean, if it has the features you want you should be able to buy it. But MS will not sell you licenses for it at any price. So, if you want to be productive, you have no choice but to upgrade everything to the latest version.
They do it by making new versions of software incompatible with older versions and refusing to sell the older versions. That means that if you have a company happily using, say, Office 97 and you need to buy some new computers, you have no choice but to get Office XP (or
Methinks maybe he decided he couldn't do it, and is now trying to blame his problems on something other than his own lack of ability.
I think the same thing. He sounds a lot like Derek Smart to me.
I would like to hear of a more successful system anywhere in the world.
I predict that you will not recieve a response to this point. It's a good point, but it will be ignored.
"[SCO] said that until the parties go to court, it doesn't want the Linux community to remove the code in question. SCO thinks it's more than changing a few lines of code."
I'd bet a all the money I have that if that "offending" code was revealed tonight we'd have it all rewritten by Monday morning. The Linux community is more angry about this than anything that has ever touched it. All that anger would be unleached in an orgy of coding the likes of which even God has not seen.
SCO is afraid the reason for thier lawsuit will vanish is they reveal their hand.
"[SCO] feels large chunks are derivative. It argued that even a full replacement would be in part based on the prior effort, and thus would itself be derivative, at least under the terms of the IBM contract."
Sorry. no. It'd be easy to get around this. You tell me what code infriges and I'll post the input and expected output from that code (without even revealing where the code is). Any programmer who independently writes code that meets those requirements has NOT infringed SCO's licences.
I find it rather hard to believe that Knuth's analysis of algorithms of Sorting and Searching have/will become out dated.
It's too bad that you mentioned searching and sorting because it seems a lot of the other replies here jumped on that issue and completely missed your point.
The Art of Programming isn't about either of those topics. It's about algorithms. Knuth uses seaching and sorting as a means to the ends of teaching the programmer to think about his algorithms. As other people have pointed out, a modern programmer is unlikely to implement either a search algorithm or a sort algorithm. But they use other algorithms to every day. They invent algorithms every day.
The core of programming is ability to examine a problem and create algorithms to solve it. That's what programmers do (unless of course we're talking about VB programmers doing little more than connecting an interface to a control). At any rate, Knuth teaches algorithms - not searching and not sorting.
The bottom line is, Knuth's work is still relevant and quite useful.
The NSA does not (seem well defined to me)
Well, a good place to start defining them might be their website (nsa.gov). but I guess the website is just a front for the conspiracy. right?
You still haven't responded to the question I asked about the NSA's distribution of Linux. It's right there on their homepage. You can download it and look at the source code yourself - to check for any nasty trojans. How does your theory that the NSA wants to destroy Linux fit with the fact that the NSA gives away Linux??
You'll have to provide a link to the story about the German email routing problem. I searched google but couldn't find anything (maybe google is a part of the conspiracy!). Would I be out of line to suggest that the servers in Germany were misconfigured by poorly trained admins?
except that the NSA has released its own versions of Linux.
Where did you get the idea that the NSA was this shadowy cult bent on world domination? They're just cryptographers and cryptanalists.
I have to say that I agree with you. It does seem like a limit on speech.
the nose in that artist's rendetion is very distinctive.
HEre's a stupid question. I'm waiting on hold for the teleconference and the lady's voice comes up and says "you are holding for the sko conference"
is the company name pronounced sko or S-C-O
driving is a privilidge given by the state
would you agree that walking on public streets is also a priviledge? How about breathing the public air? Can you list for me all of the rights that I have that the government cannot take away? I suspect that all of them except sitting quietly and thinking to myself will involve something that could be said to be public property.
Doesn't the mere fact that they were manipulating the matrix to do what they wanted it to do qualify as a hack?
In the same sence that scaring the birds in the park qualifies as manipulation. It's not the same thing as breaking through the security of the matrix itself. If you could do that, turning off the power to a few city blocks would be small fries.
I just want to point at that at no time during the movie did anyone "hack" the Matrix. Sure, Trinity is shown breaking into an unsecure computer while inside the Matrix, but that's really not the same thing.
I'm no lawyer, but I think the RIAA would argue:
a. you are only entitled to the fair market price for your work. So, they'd pay you $0.99 or something.
b. a machine (spider) bypassed the click through so they were not bound by it. Now that they are aware of the EULA they elect not to agree and promise to delete all copies of your work.
or the judge will throw out a 1billion dollar claim as just plain stupid. Now, if your click-through set the price at $5 per song you might get away with this. You'd just need 1000's of songs see any real money.
From the article: Mystro TV decides which programs can be recorded and whether ads can be skipped.
I'm trying to picture them asking advertisers if it's ok to allow viewers to skip their ads. "Oh, sure" they'll say "we don't mind if they skip this ad we paid a megabuck for"
That's not likely to happen. So basically, every ad will be skip-protected and this device will actually be worse than an old fashioned VCR.
Are they sure? I always thought it was the butterflies in central park that determined the weather in Europe. Oh wait, no, I'm thinking of hurricanes
I'm no lawyer, but I think it's ok to copy content from a news or opinion site as long as you cite your source. In other words, I *think* you're on solid ground if you copy the entire text of a news article and append the date and the place you copied it from.
There are a couple of reasons why an author might have a problem with you doing this: Firstly, if you draw customers (and therefore ad revenue) away from their site, they wont like it. So, what I suggest is that, at the time you open a discussion thread, you cache the article but don't link to your cache at that time. Link to the original. Later on, if the article becomes unavailable, you can add a link to the cache (I'd keep the original link too though).
Secondly, if you surround the cached copy with content from your own site - if you put your own banner ads at the top or your site's menus along the sides etc. - if you do that, you make it seem like the author wrote the article for you, or gave you permission to publish it. You make it seem like you have some relationship with the author and that just isn't true. So, I'd suggest that the cached copy open in its own window and contain nothing but the article text.
I think these two suggestions are just common courtesy and journalistic integrity.
If the author still demands that the cached content be removed, I think you should take it down. In its place, you could put a report or review of the article. You can't copy directly from the article as that's plagiarism. But you can quote the important lines and cite it. Think of it as your own journalistic report. If they still have a problem with that, you should tell them "the content of my site accurately reflects my opinions regarding an article you published and constitutes fair use of that article." If they persist beyond that - get a lawyer and counter sue for harassment.