This is exactly what I was wondering. Seems like you could just transfer the idea to "me and joe both own half the CD, so we each have MP3s of it". And then use this to get out of all lawsuits since "I hereby declare that every person in America owns a percentage of this new CD I just bought, and thus may have exactly one MP3 copy by law".
Then of course there's another side of this - if I buy 1 share of Microsoft, am I entitled to install a copy of everything they make (I know, why would you want to etc etc)?
Not a bug per se, just the non-spec implementation of javascript in IE. If you have ever done any web development you should know what I mean. IE has always had its own version that doesn't follow the rules. These are not just IE-only extensions, mind you, but also stuff that is just plain broken that IE allows but should not. This used to be a big deal when there was a legitimate browser war going on, having to make two versions of a site, or at least test it in a variety of browsers so as to shape the code into something that works in more than just IE. Those days are apparently gone.
I use Windows and I love Firebird. As you say, the tabs & pop-up blocking are great. But, I am sad to say, I would like to have an optional add-on to allow for the broken javascript parsing of IE, since I often run across sites developed only for IE which don't work or don't behave as expected in Firebird. Something with a toggle would be nice, so I could just turn it on once I hit a bad page (and thus save me from having to open IE and copy the URL over). Maybe something like this exists already (prolly not)?
There is a remarkably self-hating attitude here in the US that we Americans do everything wrong and we get what we deserve. I'm no fan of our current moro^H^H^H^Hpresident, but here's an idea: if it's us or them, I choose us. You can be sure every other nation in the world has the same motto.
Just to clarify, from what I've read everything (protein,carbs,fat) can be turned into fat as long as carbs are present. Remove carbs (and thus excess insulin) from the equation and the body will not create fat. However, eating low-carb you do run the risk your body will convert the fat you eat into energy, thus skipping any pound-shedding. So keep the fat to a minimum in all cases I guess.
Btw, I did a variation on Atkins last year called "Protein Power" where I kept my carbs to under 100g/day (otherwise eating like a hog) and I lost 40 lbs in about 2 months. BUT about 15 of that was apparently water, because it came back almost immediately when I quit. (Quit because it was getting too expensive to come up with protein that I could stand to eat all the time).
Is there still a performance hit? I have one of the older ones and the problem with them is the way files are accessed. There's no file system per se. So if you add a bigger drive and load it up with files, it will take forever to start up each time as it "prepares the library", i.e., builds a list of files from scratch.
So long as Microsoft sees fit not to exercise it's massive patent portfolio. I'd sure bet my business on Microsoft playing nice...not.
Hmmm, knowing MS, I doubt they'd intentionally damage potential customers. Instead they will probably either (a) kill mono soon, or (b) wait until the people who are going to use mono get entrenched and then kill mono, offering.NET stuff at a discount to get them on board, thus sucking in as much of the linux crowd as possible while looking like the good guys.
A lot of folks are using java, but I should point out that where I live java job postings are way outnumbered by.NET postings -.NET is growing quickly considering the state of the economy.
A friend at work got one of those over a year ago, so it's not new. I submitted it as a slashdot story in the hopes the site could get slashdotted at least, but it was of course rejected.
I concur; the slashdot archives could be pretty useful for a lot of stuff, and pretty amusing as well. I'd check slashdot for tech questions I can't answer with google, and I'd check it first to find good opinions about products/languages/vendors. I'd totally pay for a subscription with full searching.
Hmmm that's interesting. Seems to imply software cannot be copyrighted at all. Patented is another story. But "idea, procedure, process, system, method of operation, concept, principle, or discovery" seems to aptly describe what code is and does to me.
The sad part is the guy would have to put in over 8 months of work in 4 months (12*7=84 hrs/week). I somehow doubt they would give him 4 months of vacation time...
Macros are great if you have a lot of repetitive code that you can't get around doing (i.e., you can't just create and call a method/function to do xyz for whatever reason). This doesn't happen in Java much, at least not that I have found. But I used to have to do data processing in this obscure, unmentionable scripting language, and once I taught myself the macro syntax I was able work faster and make the QA dept's life a lot easier.
I know this won't get read, but I have to weigh in with this point that seems overlooked: NCAs are simply an artificial method to keep wages down. After all, you wouldn't generally worry about someone jumping ship if you were willing to pay them what someone else was; the NCA eliminates the conversation where the employee asks for a raise on the grounds he has an offer elsewhere. Hell, it eliminates the "offer elsewhere" entirely.
Hmmm, it also seems to interfere with the free market by eliminating currently employed people from the potential labor pool. If widely adopted, the standard NCA would effectively bring about a new Soviet-style state where no one could ever leave their jobs. But I guess theoretically you could still choose your first (and only) job. Sweet!
I can't speak on the Roddenberry thing, but I just thought of something regarding the public irritation thing. Seasons 1 & 2 are just plain awful, and are also pretty Wesley-heavy (or at least heavy with bad Wesley moments). But that's not the character's fault or Wil Wheaton's fault, it's just because those two years are so unwatchably bad overall, especially in comparison with what came later (i.e., good writing). The Wesley stuff later on was much better, and I think that gets overlooked because everybody remembers the awfulness of the Wesley character in seasons 1 & 2 (overlooking for some reason the equally-embarassing antics of Data, Worf and Geordi at various points).
Right, so why would the borg bother with time travel when it would not affect their existence in any way? Why would the enterprise-e crew see the specific altered version of earth that the borg went back to change? By your statement the enterprise-e should see no change because an alternate timeline would have been created with the change, of which they would have had no knowledge. But they did see the change, and further were 'protected' from its effects. Same timeline. That's why I am saying I think the FC writers ignored that whole can of worms about the alternate timelines. It doesn't matter what is correct in theory, it just matters what the writers went with in FC for the purposes of this discussion.
I think Trek writers are taking a simpler approach than you propose. In First Contact it is made clear that the borg went back in time and messed with Picard's timeline; they even comment that they were protected from being erased by being in the wake of the borg ship. Same universe, same timeline. See what I mean? If it's true that Picard's interference would open a different, parallel timeline for Archer to exist in, why wouldn't the borg's interference do the same, thus botching their plan? What would be the point in the borg messing with the past if it didn't affect their specific future in their own timeline?
These (Trek) shows are always B-A-D for the first couple of years. It just takes a while to find a groove and figure out how to write the gimmicky characters they created. Actually that's not totally true, because TOS was fairly consistent until Roddenberry left in year 3. And TNG was bad partly because of Roddenberry (ironically for the same reasons that made TOS work) until year 3. But DS9 was kind of awkward at first, so was Voyager (which I think really had the best concept of any of them - if they would have just used Nick Locarno instead of inventing Tom Paris! Same actor, nearly identical characters! Hello!), so apparently is Enterprise.
But it seems to be getting better - last night's episode, while at times dull, had a really powerful ending. Not so much the suicide, but the confrontation afterwards.
An earlier Enterprise did encounter the borg, so to speak, when Enterprise-E encountered them in First Contact. I don't recall anyone getting their memories erased, so I'm guessing Cochrane and Lily would have retained that knowledge - maybe they decided to keep it to themselves to preserve the timeline...?
Yeah, what MS has always done even in the DOS days is buy something someone else has done. This does 2 things: a) it eliminates a competitor automatically, and b) it precludes them from having to worry about innovation in technology so they can focus on innovating in the business realm in the ways you mention.
BTW, Googling reveals that PowerPoint came from the purchase of a company named Forethought in 1987. Not sure on Project, but it started back in the mid-80s as well.
Slashdot Mirror
This is exactly what I was wondering. Seems like you could just transfer the idea to "me and joe both own half the CD, so we each have MP3s of it". And then use this to get out of all lawsuits since "I hereby declare that every person in America owns a percentage of this new CD I just bought, and thus may have exactly one MP3 copy by law".
Then of course there's another side of this - if I buy 1 share of Microsoft, am I entitled to install a copy of everything they make (I know, why would you want to etc etc)?
Not a bug per se, just the non-spec implementation of javascript in IE. If you have ever done any web development you should know what I mean. IE has always had its own version that doesn't follow the rules. These are not just IE-only extensions, mind you, but also stuff that is just plain broken that IE allows but should not. This used to be a big deal when there was a legitimate browser war going on, having to make two versions of a site, or at least test it in a variety of browsers so as to shape the code into something that works in more than just IE. Those days are apparently gone.
I use Windows and I love Firebird. As you say, the tabs & pop-up blocking are great. But, I am sad to say, I would like to have an optional add-on to allow for the broken javascript parsing of IE, since I often run across sites developed only for IE which don't work or don't behave as expected in Firebird. Something with a toggle would be nice, so I could just turn it on once I hit a bad page (and thus save me from having to open IE and copy the URL over). Maybe something like this exists already (prolly not)?
There is a remarkably self-hating attitude here in the US that we Americans do everything wrong and we get what we deserve. I'm no fan of our current moro^H^H^H^Hpresident, but here's an idea: if it's us or them, I choose us. You can be sure every other nation in the world has the same motto.
Just to clarify, from what I've read everything (protein,carbs,fat) can be turned into fat as long as carbs are present. Remove carbs (and thus excess insulin) from the equation and the body will not create fat. However, eating low-carb you do run the risk your body will convert the fat you eat into energy, thus skipping any pound-shedding. So keep the fat to a minimum in all cases I guess.
Btw, I did a variation on Atkins last year called "Protein Power" where I kept my carbs to under 100g/day (otherwise eating like a hog) and I lost 40 lbs in about 2 months. BUT about 15 of that was apparently water, because it came back almost immediately when I quit. (Quit because it was getting too expensive to come up with protein that I could stand to eat all the time).
Hmmm the reverse is true according to this.
Is there still a performance hit? I have one of the older ones and the problem with them is the way files are accessed. There's no file system per se. So if you add a bigger drive and load it up with files, it will take forever to start up each time as it "prepares the library", i.e., builds a list of files from scratch.
So long as Microsoft sees fit not to exercise it's massive patent portfolio. I'd sure bet my business on Microsoft playing nice...not.
.NET stuff at a discount to get them on board, thus sucking in as much of the linux crowd as possible while looking like the good guys.
Hmmm, knowing MS, I doubt they'd intentionally damage potential customers. Instead they will probably either (a) kill mono soon, or (b) wait until the people who are going to use mono get entrenched and then kill mono, offering
A lot of folks are using java, but I should point out that where I live java job postings are way outnumbered by .NET postings - .NET is growing quickly considering the state of the economy.
All this shows is that linux is very useful...
wait a minute, there are jobs now?
Irony was in fact king that day it seems.
A friend at work got one of those over a year ago, so it's not new. I submitted it as a slashdot story in the hopes the site could get slashdotted at least, but it was of course rejected.
I concur; the slashdot archives could be pretty useful for a lot of stuff, and pretty amusing as well. I'd check slashdot for tech questions I can't answer with google, and I'd check it first to find good opinions about products/languages/vendors. I'd totally pay for a subscription with full searching.
Hmmm that's interesting. Seems to imply software cannot be copyrighted at all. Patented is another story. But "idea, procedure, process, system, method of operation, concept, principle, or discovery" seems to aptly describe what code is and does to me.
The sad part is the guy would have to put in over 8 months of work in 4 months (12*7=84 hrs/week). I somehow doubt they would give him 4 months of vacation time...
Macros are great if you have a lot of repetitive code that you can't get around doing (i.e., you can't just create and call a method/function to do xyz for whatever reason). This doesn't happen in Java much, at least not that I have found. But I used to have to do data processing in this obscure, unmentionable scripting language, and once I taught myself the macro syntax I was able work faster and make the QA dept's life a lot easier.
I know this won't get read, but I have to weigh in with this point that seems overlooked: NCAs are simply an artificial method to keep wages down. After all, you wouldn't generally worry about someone jumping ship if you were willing to pay them what someone else was; the NCA eliminates the conversation where the employee asks for a raise on the grounds he has an offer elsewhere. Hell, it eliminates the "offer elsewhere" entirely.
Hmmm, it also seems to interfere with the free market by eliminating currently employed people from the potential labor pool. If widely adopted, the standard NCA would effectively bring about a new Soviet-style state where no one could ever leave their jobs. But I guess theoretically you could still choose your first (and only) job. Sweet!
Of course the "recycling" is probably like when PC mfrs recycle computers - just ship em off to dump somewhere else outside the confines of US law.
I can't speak on the Roddenberry thing, but I just thought of something regarding the public irritation thing. Seasons 1 & 2 are just plain awful, and are also pretty Wesley-heavy (or at least heavy with bad Wesley moments). But that's not the character's fault or Wil Wheaton's fault, it's just because those two years are so unwatchably bad overall, especially in comparison with what came later (i.e., good writing). The Wesley stuff later on was much better, and I think that gets overlooked because everybody remembers the awfulness of the Wesley character in seasons 1 & 2 (overlooking for some reason the equally-embarassing antics of Data, Worf and Geordi at various points).
It's a theory, anyway.
Right, so why would the borg bother with time travel when it would not affect their existence in any way? Why would the enterprise-e crew see the specific altered version of earth that the borg went back to change? By your statement the enterprise-e should see no change because an alternate timeline would have been created with the change, of which they would have had no knowledge. But they did see the change, and further were 'protected' from its effects. Same timeline. That's why I am saying I think the FC writers ignored that whole can of worms about the alternate timelines. It doesn't matter what is correct in theory, it just matters what the writers went with in FC for the purposes of this discussion.
I think Trek writers are taking a simpler approach than you propose. In First Contact it is made clear that the borg went back in time and messed with Picard's timeline; they even comment that they were protected from being erased by being in the wake of the borg ship. Same universe, same timeline. See what I mean? If it's true that Picard's interference would open a different, parallel timeline for Archer to exist in, why wouldn't the borg's interference do the same, thus botching their plan? What would be the point in the borg messing with the past if it didn't affect their specific future in their own timeline?
These (Trek) shows are always B-A-D for the first couple of years. It just takes a while to find a groove and figure out how to write the gimmicky characters they created. Actually that's not totally true, because TOS was fairly consistent until Roddenberry left in year 3. And TNG was bad partly because of Roddenberry (ironically for the same reasons that made TOS work) until year 3. But DS9 was kind of awkward at first, so was Voyager (which I think really had the best concept of any of them - if they would have just used Nick Locarno instead of inventing Tom Paris! Same actor, nearly identical characters! Hello!), so apparently is Enterprise.
But it seems to be getting better - last night's episode, while at times dull, had a really powerful ending. Not so much the suicide, but the confrontation afterwards.
An earlier Enterprise did encounter the borg, so to speak, when Enterprise-E encountered them in First Contact. I don't recall anyone getting their memories erased, so I'm guessing Cochrane and Lily would have retained that knowledge - maybe they decided to keep it to themselves to preserve the timeline...?
Yeah, what MS has always done even in the DOS days is buy something someone else has done. This does 2 things: a) it eliminates a competitor automatically, and b) it precludes them from having to worry about innovation in technology so they can focus on innovating in the business realm in the ways you mention.
BTW, Googling reveals that PowerPoint came from the purchase of a company named Forethought in 1987. Not sure on Project, but it started back in the mid-80s as well.