Waking up after a hibernate or sleep is down to the operating system - but the BIOS still has to boot, so this improvement will help your wake-up time just as much as your boot time.
Behaviours that were prevalent a few hundred years ago are now classified as sociopathic. That's the very definition of the word - a behaviour that is harmful to society. So plenty of normal human behaviours (violence, theft, rape, etc.) are classified as sociopathic, and I think that's a good thing.
No, through nationalism. This is against a specific nationality, nothing to do with ethnicity. Taiwan is not covered by this warning, and they're the same stock.
It's not paranoia if they really are out to get you. And we have plenty of evidence that the Chinese really are. Actually, the intelligence agencies probably just forgot to say "because we're doing all this stuff to their top executives when they visit us".
Well, to be honest, I'm not sure about the technical term, I might be mis-remembering a drunken conversation at a convention in Germany a few years ago. It's basically that the ground is a 2d surface deformed in the vertical dimension, rather than being a fully 3d object.
I'd rather that universities had access to multiple engines so they can study the different approaches to different problems. Tech3 is an enclosed-spaces engine, you don't get that many Quake levels that are open, rolling hills. If you do, it's a hack and you are actually in a cave with a sky-texture flag on the ceiling. CryEngine and Halo are ground-folding engines, so they can do the big open spaces thing but have to use hacks to have cliffs and caves and overhangs.
So what should the government, today, have done other than to issue a statement? And who is the them that you are talking about? Most of them are dead now. Should Brown have issued this apology on the day he took office? How many days of a new government would be taken up entirely by thinking up and issuing apologies for governmental wrongdoings all the way back to King Arthur's poor treatment of Lancelot?
They didn't cut a deal with publishers, they cut a deal with some publishers, on behalf of everyone in the world that holds copyright on a book. The only way to do that is to break the law and hope to get sued, otherwise you cannot compete with Google. That's not an acceptable way to do change how copyright works.
There's no way that this deal can be called a settlement for past infringement. It's a licence to commit future infringement, and that's ludicrous. I re-assert that I would not object to this if the deal were open to other organizations that haven't yet set themselves up as a target for a class action.
I sell you an ice cream cone for 5 cents. Someone else goes running all over the neighborhood yelling about how there's no way that I will sell everyone else an ice cream cone for 5 cents, and therefore your ice cream cone must be taken away.
Are the flaws in that logic obvious now?
Here's a better comparison. Google takes my ice-cream, and lots of other peoples' ice creams, and sells them for 5 cents. We sue in a class action suit, but the result is that Google can continue selling anyone's ice creams for 5 cents and give us 3 cents, unless we opt out. Now the other ice-cream sellers are all put out of business because they aren't allowed to take anyone else's ice-creams and sell them for 5 cents because no-one sued them for trying to. Now I know that ice-creams (physical property) are a bad analogy, but you sometimes have to work with what you've got.
2) Microsoft and Microsoft-shills have been pushing the idea for a month or so now that no one else will get this deal in the future. This *is* a problem.
I don't see how you can claim that the opponents are Microsoft-shills, as Microsoft aren't even in the digital book business any more. Is archive.org a Microsoft shill now? How about the FSF and the UCLA? I certainly am not.
3) The correct way to deal with that problem, should it arise, is for the organizations looking to get in on the same deal Google has to sue the publishers.
Which publishers? All of the ones involved in the class-action suit that is setting this deal up? Google now has the right to publish my dad's book, do they have to sue my dad as well in order to be allowed to compete with google? He was recently diagnosed with Parkinsons Disease, I don't think he's up for a court battle with Microsoft, or any of their "shills".
The GFDL and GPL aren't about money, though, so being able to get money off Google in return for them stripping the document's recipient of the rights that you want them to have is not an answer.
Well, there is that, but on the other hand they are absolutely spot on, the article is the best summary I've seen of the problems with the Google book deal. I dislike Microsoft, and I use Google all the time, but this deal really is a bad one.
Slashdot Mirror
Does this kind of debate always have to be characterised in terms of a WWF match or a wild-west gunfight?
Where's my goddamn flying car???
Waking up after a hibernate or sleep is down to the operating system - but the BIOS still has to boot, so this improvement will help your wake-up time just as much as your boot time.
This is nothing to do with the OS, this is about reducing the time before the OS starts to load. There's not much the BIOS can do from then on.
My screen is far wider than I need it to be so I think it's cool to be able to use some of that extra width.
http://xkcd.com/292/
If some PR company tries to spin a bad story, they should be forced to say "The truth has been altered to change the appearance of this corporation".
Behaviours that were prevalent a few hundred years ago are now classified as sociopathic. That's the very definition of the word - a behaviour that is harmful to society. So plenty of normal human behaviours (violence, theft, rape, etc.) are classified as sociopathic, and I think that's a good thing.
No, through nationalism. This is against a specific nationality, nothing to do with ethnicity. Taiwan is not covered by this warning, and they're the same stock.
It's not paranoia if they really are out to get you. And we have plenty of evidence that the Chinese really are. Actually, the intelligence agencies probably just forgot to say "because we're doing all this stuff to their top executives when they visit us".
Well, to be honest, I'm not sure about the technical term, I might be mis-remembering a drunken conversation at a convention in Germany a few years ago. It's basically that the ground is a 2d surface deformed in the vertical dimension, rather than being a fully 3d object.
The students, however, will have blown their loans on quad-core Xeon laptops with dual Radeon 9900 graphics cards.
CryEngine me a river?
I'd rather that universities had access to multiple engines so they can study the different approaches to different problems. Tech3 is an enclosed-spaces engine, you don't get that many Quake levels that are open, rolling hills. If you do, it's a hack and you are actually in a cave with a sky-texture flag on the ceiling. CryEngine and Halo are ground-folding engines, so they can do the big open spaces thing but have to use hacks to have cliffs and caves and overhangs.
Being a Jew and owning a business was made illegal in Germany in the '30s. I guess there's nothing to apologise for there, either.
So what should the government, today, have done other than to issue a statement? And who is the them that you are talking about? Most of them are dead now. Should Brown have issued this apology on the day he took office? How many days of a new government would be taken up entirely by thinking up and issuing apologies for governmental wrongdoings all the way back to King Arthur's poor treatment of Lancelot?
Cellphones have been classified as "instruments of crime" on arrest reports before now.
They didn't cut a deal with publishers, they cut a deal with some publishers, on behalf of everyone in the world that holds copyright on a book. The only way to do that is to break the law and hope to get sued, otherwise you cannot compete with Google. That's not an acceptable way to do change how copyright works.
There's no way that this deal can be called a settlement for past infringement. It's a licence to commit future infringement, and that's ludicrous. I re-assert that I would not object to this if the deal were open to other organizations that haven't yet set themselves up as a target for a class action.
Best strawman ever! Thanks.
So who is, say, archive.org supposed to sue?
I sell you an ice cream cone for 5 cents. Someone else goes running all over the neighborhood yelling about how there's no way that I will sell everyone else an ice cream cone for 5 cents, and therefore your ice cream cone must be taken away.
Are the flaws in that logic obvious now?
Here's a better comparison. Google takes my ice-cream, and lots of other peoples' ice creams, and sells them for 5 cents. We sue in a class action suit, but the result is that Google can continue selling anyone's ice creams for 5 cents and give us 3 cents, unless we opt out. Now the other ice-cream sellers are all put out of business because they aren't allowed to take anyone else's ice-creams and sell them for 5 cents because no-one sued them for trying to. Now I know that ice-creams (physical property) are a bad analogy, but you sometimes have to work with what you've got.
2) Microsoft and Microsoft-shills have been pushing the idea for a month or so now that no one else will get this deal in the future. This *is* a problem.
I don't see how you can claim that the opponents are Microsoft-shills, as Microsoft aren't even in the digital book business any more. Is archive.org a Microsoft shill now? How about the FSF and the UCLA? I certainly am not.
3) The correct way to deal with that problem, should it arise, is for the organizations looking to get in on the same deal Google has to sue the publishers.
Which publishers? All of the ones involved in the class-action suit that is setting this deal up? Google now has the right to publish my dad's book, do they have to sue my dad as well in order to be allowed to compete with google? He was recently diagnosed with Parkinsons Disease, I don't think he's up for a court battle with Microsoft, or any of their "shills".
The GFDL and GPL aren't about money, though, so being able to get money off Google in return for them stripping the document's recipient of the rights that you want them to have is not an answer.
I think the basic idea is a good one, but it just needs to be non-Google-specific.
Well, there is that, but on the other hand they are absolutely spot on, the article is the best summary I've seen of the problems with the Google book deal. I dislike Microsoft, and I use Google all the time, but this deal really is a bad one.
tear them a new a-hole
Don't forget it's also a rich source of humour!
Many would willing give their life to help build an establishment for their country or just for science.
We sent people to the Americas to establish a colony for our country - and look what happened!