I always thought that McAfee was a marvelous virus stopper!
McAfee did it by the excellent and novel way of using up all the available CPU cycles which neatly prevents viruses from working at all! Never any risks! And it was smart enough to scale if you added more CPU or RAM. Furthermore it actually prevented viruses from reaching your system by gobbling up all the available network bandwidth as well!
Tell that to all those people that can't metabolize alcohol. But anyway, you said you wouldn't have a drug addict drive a school bus. My answer was: What about an alcoholic?
There is no difference: Alcohol is just as dangerous as any other drug when used in the wrong context and with too big a dose.
Yes, I am one of the few people who don't use iTunes, but I do use Quicktime.
After reading this article I restarted apple's automatic updater (which I usually keep killed). Apple indeed came with a Quicktime update,but then Apple proposed I "update" iTunes and Safari too!!
>> Religion is also a large part of the reason for suppression of knowledge, increases in fear and >> the idea that "ideas are dangerous."
Look around you! Knowledge is power! And keeping the masses dumb is one of the tool of staying in power.
The only thing that brings religions into this is that the primitive shaman was the first to realise it.
The beauty of the Internet is that it is defusing that tool. Since the coming of the Internet the main source of all information is not top down anymore, and cannot easily be filtered.
Beside Pakistan, I also believe that all the powers that be (yes, ours too) are also attempting to destroy the Internet, or at least severely restricting it, because of this.
Not necessarily. The situation is not new, if today a wheel breaks off from your new car you already get the same possible legal consequences. Any car (or whatever) builder has to bear the risk that whatever they make may breaks because of a construction defect, with possible lethal (and costly) results.
As you probably realize, the cost for that risk is included in the price of the car.
Licence permissiveness has always been one directional.
Code distributed as public domain can be distributed under a BSD licence, but not the otherway arround. Code that was BSD can be distributed under GPL, but not the otherway arround. etc...
The trouble GPL people have with BSD is that BSD permits code to be distributed as a much more restrictive licence (ie closed sources). Apparently BSD people have this same problem with their own licence, but only when it is distributed as an other open source licence which happen to not allow that.
Your reply is clearly and obviously correct. Except it didn't really answer my question. But then, I must admit, it wasn't really a question. More of a general remark about the bizarre article titles we get now a day. These short sentences are evidently fuelled by the speed peoples want to scan through article headlines for keywords which spark their interest.
Actually, in your rephrase, you could have left out the 'recent'. Although geologically 'recent' still applies, 16 months ago is, at least to me, old new.
I understand what you say (I think), and I agree. You seem to misunderstand what I say, which is why you believe I contradict you (so it seems to me). The difference (as I understand it) is mainly that you speak about individuals while paradigms and paradigm shifts only apply in significant populations.
I will never imply all groups of people think the same way. They don't. If that were true the world would be a sad place indeed (and boring)
But paradigms and how or when they shift has not been invented by me. The term was coined in 1962 by Thomas Kuhn (so Google tells me). The word has a clear definition and a context within which it is supposed to be valid.
To finish of about intelligent design or evolution. The paradigm does not say who is correct, only what the majority believes. Remember: there used to be a paradigm that the south part of the world was on fire (after all, the more you went south the hotter it got and the more you went north the colder it got). This prevented more than one expedition from even starting!
Paradigm shifts describe the event when a truth is displaced by an other in a significant group of people. It does not say how that happen, just that it does.
What you describe is a mechanism which might cause a paradigm shift in a scientific minded group of people.
You will recognise the pattern : - the truth is accepted by a group - A small part of that group is unhappy with that truth and come up with a new truth : they are ignored. - They Convince some other people : They are laught at. - They Convince some more : The previous group will actively fight them - Paradigm shift: They win. - The truth is accepted - A small part of that group is unhappy with that truth and come up with a new truth : they are ignored. - etc, etc, ad nauseam...
I think you assume that people that studied behave significantly differently in this matter from people that didn't. They don't. So Paradigm shifts happen in a group of scientists just like it does in the "general puplic".
You are right, though, when you say that "The Truth" in one segment of a population is a complet falsehood in some other.
Paradigm Shifts are moments in history when the truth, as seen by the majority, changes to an other one.
No one can force one of these to happen as they are bound by the passing of the generations (sometimes many: see religion), when old encrusted ideas literally die with the oldest generation.
This means it take time, there is just no way arround it, but eventually a new "The Truth" arrises (which can also be a revived old truth, and will include some new false things), which will replace the old one.
And suddendly (maybe) the light speed will be a problem no more.
Any respectable/. user should have most of this suite installed already
Who is that guy writing about ?
Any respectable/. user I know would run only Open Source Software
and would have nothing to do with anything needing a virus checker.
no need to be a Physicist. Heat will tend to travel from the hotspot to the cold spot. The speed this is happening is dependant on the gradient, so will tend to slow down immediately (as cold spot get hotter, and hot spot get colder), creating bel like curve (in 3D) with the center hotter than the outer edge. Actually it's not a bel, more like a log curve, except it's not, but I don't remember the name in English.
I got firefox 1.05 so, were I to believe the guy, it must have this bug, yet when I tried I only got the "keyword:---- etc..." from Google's I'am feeling lucky.
As I understand it, the iPod's DRM cannot be used as long as Apple refuses to license it's DRM technologie.
But of course you are right: there are many DRM provider. Sony has it's own, The publisher McGraw Hill uses something called Zinio. The US libraries could have used more than one DRM type, maybe depending on user request, instead of forcing people to use just MS.
Interresting read (I didn't finish it, maybe it gets boring later on). Apparently there are about a hunderd different commercial DRM technics available, none of them good enough.
The bad part is that they relied on Andersen Consulting (Accidenture, for those who know) to research this.
I didn't say he shouldn't, I just doubt 10000 (any monetary unit) would do anything more than "ploink" in the ocean.
The car analogy is a bit wrong. The earth is not about to "break down" as such (i.e. stop functionning), it's just changing to our disadvantage. I like the analogy though. I'll try to use that again.
I completely disagree---as long as we are talking about something produced for publication. If you produce something purely for private viewing, that's one thing.
Wel, that's what the producers did: they produced something for purely private viewing, and you're not invited till you pay. So you and the producer both agree.
What you guys don't agree on, is what the word Private means.
In my opinion, morally it's quite wrong to try to watch something somebody produced (a movie), which he has not allowed you to watch (by using an un-authorized decoder).
However it's a moral disgrace that that same producer _is_ willing to sell (licence) their product to anybody without giving that same person atomatically also the right to watch it.
Does both wrongs cancel each other out ?
my believe is that the second wrong make my first wrong acceptable (I really do pay for most of this material).
Slashdot Mirror
I always thought that McAfee was a marvelous virus stopper!
McAfee did it by the excellent and novel way of using up all the available CPU cycles which neatly prevents viruses from working at all! Never any risks!
And it was smart enough to scale if you added more CPU or RAM. Furthermore it actually prevented viruses from reaching your system by gobbling up all the available network bandwidth as well!
All praise Intel!
Tell that to all those people that can't metabolize alcohol.
But anyway, you said you wouldn't have a drug addict drive a school bus. My answer was: What about an alcoholic?
There is no difference: Alcohol is just as dangerous as any other drug when used in the wrong context and with too big a dose.
Alcohol does incapacitate it's users (yes, it does), yet is legal.
Sorry, you don't have case. Legalisation is still the cheapest way to stop drug cartels.
Yes, I am one of the few people who don't use iTunes, but I do use Quicktime.
After reading this article I restarted apple's automatic updater (which I usually keep killed). Apple indeed came with a Quicktime update,but then Apple proposed I "update" iTunes and Safari too!!
it's an invasion !!
>> Religion is also a large part of the reason for suppression of knowledge, increases in fear and
>> the idea that "ideas are dangerous."
Look around you! Knowledge is power! And keeping the masses dumb is one of the tool of staying in power.
The only thing that brings religions into this is that the primitive shaman was the first to realise it.
The beauty of the Internet is that it is defusing that tool. Since the coming of the Internet the main source of all information is not top down anymore, and cannot easily be filtered.
Beside Pakistan, I also believe that all the powers that be (yes, ours too) are also attempting to destroy the Internet, or at least severely restricting it, because of this.
Ernest.
Not necessarily. The situation is not new, if today a wheel breaks off from your new car you already get the same possible legal consequences. Any car (or whatever) builder has to bear the risk that whatever they make may breaks because of a construction defect, with possible lethal (and costly) results.
As you probably realize, the cost for that risk is included in the price of the car.
Licence permissiveness has always been one directional.
Code distributed as public domain can be distributed under a BSD licence, but not the otherway arround.
Code that was BSD can be distributed under GPL, but not the otherway arround.
etc
The trouble GPL people have with BSD is that BSD permits code to be distributed as a much more restrictive licence (ie closed sources). Apparently BSD people have this same problem with their own licence, but only when it is distributed as an other open source licence which happen to not allow that.
Ernest.
Both your 'interpretations' are obviously correct. The first one theoretically, and the second one, well ... that just reality, right ?
Well, look at what bordom leeds to!
Your reply is clearly and obviously correct. Except it didn't really answer my question. But then, I must admit, it wasn't really a question. More of a general remark about the bizarre article titles we get now a day. These short sentences are evidently fuelled by the speed peoples want to scan through article headlines for keywords which spark their interest.
Actually, in your rephrase, you could have left out the 'recent'. Although geologically 'recent' still applies, 16 months ago is, at least to me, old new.
Ernest.
Arctic ice shelf collapse poses risk: expert
Whose English is that ?
That would prevent me having a private web site on a pc at home.
I understand what you say (I think), and I agree. You seem to misunderstand what I say, which is why you believe I contradict you (so it seems to me). The difference (as I understand it) is mainly that you speak about individuals while paradigms and paradigm shifts only apply in significant populations.
I will never imply all groups of people think the same way. They don't. If that were true the world would be a sad place indeed (and boring)
But paradigms and how or when they shift has not been invented by me. The term was coined in 1962 by Thomas Kuhn (so Google tells me). The word has a clear definition and a context within which it is supposed to be valid.
To finish of about intelligent design or evolution. The paradigm does not say who is correct, only what the majority believes. Remember: there used to be a paradigm that the south part of the world was on fire (after all, the more you went south the hotter it got and the more you went north the colder it got). This prevented more than one expedition from even starting!
Paradigm shifts describe the event when a truth is displaced by an other in a significant group of people. It does not say how that happen, just that it does.
...
What you describe is a mechanism which might cause a paradigm shift in a scientific minded group of people.
You will recognise the pattern :
- the truth is accepted by a group
- A small part of that group is unhappy with that truth and come up with a new truth : they are ignored.
- They Convince some other people : They are laught at.
- They Convince some more : The previous group will actively fight them
- Paradigm shift: They win.
- The truth is accepted
- A small part of that group is unhappy with that truth and come up with a new truth : they are ignored.
- etc, etc, ad nauseam
I think you assume that people that studied behave significantly differently in this matter from people that didn't. They don't. So Paradigm shifts happen in a group of scientists just like it does in the "general puplic".
You are right, though, when you say that "The Truth" in one segment of a population is a complet falsehood in some other.
This is what Paradigm Shifts are all about.
Paradigm Shifts are moments in history when the truth, as seen by the majority, changes to an other one.
No one can force one of these to happen as they are bound by the passing of the generations (sometimes many: see religion), when old encrusted ideas literally die with the oldest generation.
This means it take time, there is just no way arround it, but eventually a new "The Truth" arrises (which can also be a revived old truth, and will include some new false things), which will replace the old one.
And suddendly (maybe) the light speed will be a problem no more.
Have faith (and patience)!
Ernest.
Any respectable /. user should have most of this suite installed already
/. user I know would run only Open Source Software
Who is that guy writing about ?
Any respectable
and would have nothing to do with anything needing a virus checker.
no need to be a Physicist. Heat will tend to travel from the hotspot to the cold spot. The speed this is happening is dependant on the gradient, so will tend to slow down immediately (as cold spot get hotter, and hot spot get colder), creating bel like curve (in 3D) with the center hotter than the outer edge.
Actually it's not a bel, more like a log curve, except it's not, but I don't remember the name in English.
same here. I have no idea what this guy means.
I got firefox 1.05 so, were I to believe the guy, it must have this bug, yet when I tried I only got the "keyword:---- etc..." from Google's I'am feeling lucky.
I guess just some bonso who wants some attention.
The American Association of Publishers has a special section about Ebooks, and an interresting document about their view of how DRM in Ebooks should be here.
Apparently there are currently about a hunderd commercial DRM technics available, none of them good enough.
As I understand it, the iPod's DRM cannot be used as long as Apple refuses to license it's DRM technologie.
But of course you are right: there are many DRM provider. Sony has it's own, The publisher McGraw Hill uses something called Zinio. The US libraries could have used more than one DRM type, maybe depending on user request, instead of forcing people to use just MS.
But Interestingly the American Association of Publishers (AAP) provides a document here about what they believe DRM for Ebooks should be.
Interresting read (I didn't finish it, maybe it gets boring later on). Apparently there are about a hunderd different commercial DRM technics available, none of them good enough.
The bad part is that they relied on Andersen Consulting (Accidenture, for those who know) to research this.
I didn't say he shouldn't, I just doubt 10000 (any monetary unit) would do anything more than "ploink" in the ocean.
The car analogy is a bit wrong. The earth is not about to "break down" as such (i.e. stop functionning), it's just changing to our disadvantage. I like the analogy though. I'll try to use that again.
Cheers.
If you manage that with only 10000 buks you'd be amazing. Drop in the ocean type amazing.
If an idiot uses Thunderbird, he get gets riped off by a Nigerian !
Bug !!!!
Right, pffff.
I completely disagree---as long as we are talking about something produced for publication. If you produce something purely for private viewing, that's one thing.
Wel, that's what the producers did: they produced something for purely private viewing, and you're not invited till you pay. So you and the producer both agree.
What you guys don't agree on, is what the word Private means.
nop, first writer is correct, Electrolysing is the correct word.
It means approximatly electro-splitting, and is applicable whenever electricity is used to reduce a molecule into something smaller.
In my opinion, morally it's quite wrong to try to watch something somebody produced (a movie), which he has not allowed you to watch (by using an un-authorized decoder).
However it's a moral disgrace that that same producer _is_ willing to sell (licence) their product to anybody without giving that same person atomatically also the right to watch it.
Does both wrongs cancel each other out ?
my believe is that the second wrong make my first wrong acceptable (I really do pay for most of this material).