Those who hate public transport can pay to take their cars into London, simple. I might hate using a PC every day, doesn't mean I am entitled to a Sun workstation for the same price.
I agree that public transport currently sucks. I don't think that is an inherent problem with mass transit, just a result of insufficient reinvestment in the infrastructure.
Part of the argument for discouraging car use in London is the issue of public health. If I had asthma (I don't, btw), I would be more than happy for you to pay extra for the priviledge of polluting my street.
Every time we lower the bar to make it easier we seem to be telling people that they don't have to work as hard to do whatever it is that they're doing.
Isn't that the point of using a computer in the first place?
If a company were to deliberately slip patented algorithms into a competitor's code, wouldn't they risk ending up in the same position as Rambus?
Re:I now see why that MSNBC story came out today..
on
GNOME 2.0 Released
·
· Score: 1
I read the opening of that article, and it looked like someone bashing linux on MSNBC. Scroll down though, and there is a balanced, cautiously upbeat assessment of Linux's strengths and prospects. It looks like the headline writer just wrote something random and trollish, but underneath is a pretty interesting article.
Not at all, I followed the Rambus saga with interest on the register about a year ago and saw what looked like a no-good bully who was out to tax all the PC memory manufacturers.
My comment was offtopic, but I am glad that RDRAM prices have fallen, personal interest already declared.:-)
I wonder, if they persued this earlier if we wouldn't see Rambus out right now.
I'm kinda glad they didn't though. Last month I picked up 256MB RDRAM for my system at only twice the price of DDR, but at least it is available. About 18 months ago, I was worried that my system was an expensive dead end, like the MCA PS2 machines.
Don't forget those of us who do not leech off the state, can compete in a fair job market, but just don't like the backward looking little englander mentality of the UKIP.
I can't agree that this is a major reason we need the queen etc. What has caused this retreat by the government is simply public opinion.
As far as protection from our own government is concerned, don't expect the queen to be relevant. Maybe the European Court would veto the government, but not the royal family. It won't happen.
I wonder, does anyone mistake.uk or.nz people for being overly patriotic?
I think it is in UK companies' interests to use a.co.uk domain. For most services, I am looking for a provider in my own country,.co.uk makes it easy to verify that I am indeed dealing with a local outfit.
I don't think the gun analogy holds, though. If 90% of guns sold were used to unlawfully shoot someone within a week of their sale, I am sure their public distribution would be outlawed.
If you allow people to copyright digital approximations of a song, you effectively allow people to own numbers, which are a natural phenomenon.
You allow people to claim ownership of a particular arrangement of numbers, musical notes, program instructions, bricks, whatever. Just because the elements of a creation are preexistent, does not necessarily mean that anything produced from them is up for grabs.
You might want to argue that the potential for each and every song, program, car design etc is preexistent, and the producer of creative works is just the 'lucky finder', but I don't subscribe to that view.
Anything that gives them the chance to cut loose from their dependence on and vulnerability to the US -- militarily, economically, politically, whatever, especially as the lines between those categories blur -- they're going to see as a good thing.
Unless you are the UK government of course, then you will be falling over yourselves to allow Microsoft to implement the planned 'Government Gateway' online access point for government services, oh yeah, and also grant Microsoft a licence to resell any resulting intellectual property. Register article here.
To be honest, I was very disappointed by The Phantom Menace. I don't want to get burned like that again, so I probably would watch a divX of it, then decide whether it's worth watching on the big screen.
I don't say this is my moral right, but it seems wise due to the, IMO, uneven quality of the StarWars series.
How will the airlines deal with people using encrypted connections to communicate with a third party? It sounds like the ideal way for someone to coordinate, say, a large scale terrorist attack.
Hell, anyone with a modern web browser has the software installed. Then again, GSM mobile phones encrypt their traffic (I think, correct me if I'm wrong), so maybe it isn't seen as a problem.
I though of that too. It might not be much of a problem, since I guess most laptops are configured to look for fileshares, but not to share their own hard disk.
Now, since IE owns the market, Microsoft will be listening to what the content providers want.
This doesn't make sense. You say that MS own the browser market, therefore they don't have to respond to the user wishlist. If that is the case, MS don't have to listen to anybody, web developers included.
Surely those ports should be closed to traffic originating from the internet? I would have expected the actual database box to be behind the firewall, and only accepting requests from the public webserver.
Slashdot Mirror
Those who hate public transport can pay to take their cars into London, simple. I might hate using a PC every day, doesn't mean I am entitled to a Sun workstation for the same price.
I agree that public transport currently sucks. I don't think that is an inherent problem with mass transit, just a result of insufficient reinvestment in the infrastructure.
Part of the argument for discouraging car use in London is the issue of public health. If I had asthma (I don't, btw), I would be more than happy for you to pay extra for the priviledge of polluting my street.
Drive by letterboxes? You lazy sods! :-)
Every time we lower the bar to make it easier we seem to be telling people that they don't have to work as hard to do whatever it is that they're doing.
Isn't that the point of using a computer in the first place?
If a company were to deliberately slip patented algorithms into a competitor's code, wouldn't they risk ending up in the same position as Rambus?
I read the opening of that article, and it looked like someone bashing linux on MSNBC. Scroll down though, and there is a balanced, cautiously upbeat assessment of Linux's strengths and prospects. It looks like the headline writer just wrote something random and trollish, but underneath is a pretty interesting article.
Unless you are watching 60's StarTrek, then the correct pronunciation is dah-ta-bays'
Not at all, I followed the Rambus saga with interest on the register about a year ago and saw what looked like a no-good bully who was out to tax all the PC memory manufacturers.
:-)
My comment was offtopic, but I am glad that RDRAM prices have fallen, personal interest already declared.
I wonder, if they persued this earlier if we wouldn't see Rambus out right now.
I'm kinda glad they didn't though. Last month I picked up 256MB RDRAM for my system at only twice the price of DDR, but at least it is available. About 18 months ago, I was worried that my system was an expensive dead end, like the MCA PS2 machines.
Don't forget those of us who do not leech off the state, can compete in a fair job market, but just don't like the backward looking little englander mentality of the UKIP.
I can't agree that this is a major reason we need the queen etc. What has caused this retreat by the government is simply public opinion.
As far as protection from our own government is concerned, don't expect the queen to be relevant. Maybe the European Court would veto the government, but not the royal family. It won't happen.
I wonder, does anyone mistake .uk or .nz people for being overly patriotic?
I think it is in UK companies' interests to use a .co.uk domain. For most services, I am looking for a provider in my own country, .co.uk makes it easy to verify that I am indeed dealing with a local outfit.
I don't think the gun analogy holds, though. If 90% of guns sold were used to unlawfully shoot someone within a week of their sale, I am sure their public distribution would be outlawed.
But if you then asked the children to repeat the story back to you, I think you would find you had a less than perfect copy :-)
If you allow people to copyright digital approximations of a song, you effectively allow people to own numbers, which are a natural phenomenon.
You allow people to claim ownership of a particular arrangement of numbers, musical notes, program instructions, bricks, whatever. Just because the elements of a creation are preexistent, does not necessarily mean that anything produced from them is up for grabs.
You might want to argue that the potential for each and every song, program, car design etc is preexistent, and the producer of creative works is just the 'lucky finder', but I don't subscribe to that view.
Unless you are the UK government of course, then you will be falling over yourselves to allow Microsoft to implement the planned 'Government Gateway' online access point for government services, oh yeah, and also grant Microsoft a licence to resell any resulting intellectual property. Register article here.
To be honest, I was very disappointed by The Phantom Menace. I don't want to get burned like that again, so I probably would watch a divX of it, then decide whether it's worth watching on the big screen.
I don't say this is my moral right, but it seems wise due to the, IMO, uneven quality of the StarWars series.
Hell, anyone with a modern web browser has the software installed. Then again, GSM mobile phones encrypt their traffic (I think, correct me if I'm wrong), so maybe it isn't seen as a problem.
I though of that too. It might not be much of a problem, since I guess most laptops are configured to look for fileshares, but not to share their own hard disk.
Now, since IE owns the market, Microsoft will be listening to what the content providers want.
This doesn't make sense. You say that MS own the browser market, therefore they don't have to respond to the user wishlist. If that is the case, MS don't have to listen to anybody, web developers included.
I particularly like that feature of Mozilla.
I do have broadband though, and downloads are only ever initiated because I want them to be (barring the odd accidental click).
Surely those ports should be closed to traffic originating from the internet? I would have expected the actual database box to be behind the firewall, and only accepting requests from the public webserver.
Did Skylarov sell the software in the US, or did he sell it to a Russian software house who then sold in in America?
A genuine question: What tyranny?
Does the public availability of firearms reduce the probability of a repressive government being in charge? Do you have any statistics?
Hmm, so I travel to Amsterdam and smoke some dope. Does that mean I am liable to arrest if I enter the USA six months later?
Two choices:
:-)
/etc/cron.daily and move slocate.cron somewhere else (so you can put it back if you ever want to)
Go to bed earlier, catch up on your beauty sleep
Have a look in