The kind that you wouldn't be able to detect (except maybe by careful monitoring of the sun with a well-filtered telescope pointed at exactly the right spot). Imagine something much smaller than the moon and even farther away passing in front of the sun. That's what this is.
To experience a solar eclipse from a temporary sattelite would be a once-in-a-lifetime experience.
If it were noticeable. But temporary satellites (like the ISS) cast (highly-attenuated) shadows on the Earth every day.
This plug-in is kinda funny, and I hope the Mozilla folks can take a joke and enjoy the laugh. But treating "the criticism that Mozilla has received from its most recent choice of name" as if it were a serious issue suggests that the submitter of this article could stand to lighten up and look around. The vast majority of Browser Formerly Known As users seem to have taken to the the name "Firefox" pretty well. As the album cover says: 205,000 Google hits for "firefox browser" can't be wrong.
according to the GPL...I thought they only had to provide source to paying customers at their request. No one ever said they had to offer it up for free...
Sure they did. Just not at their own expense. The GPL says, "You may charge a fee for the physical act of transferring a copy." This clause was included to avoid creating a hardship for developers back when "providing the source" might mean shipping another mag tape overseas (which used to be even more costly than today). But if someone showed up on your doorstep with their own tape (or perhaps if they sent it to you return-postage paid), you'd be obligated to give them a copy free of any fee. The clear implication of this clause is that it's not to be a for-profit transaction, or limited to certain people who've paid you money for a licence... which is what is usually meant by "a paying customer". So in that sense, the parent should be modded -1, Disinformative.
So you're the one sucker who actually paid for Windows?
Him, and everyone else who bought a computer from HPaq, Dell, Gateway, etc. in the past decade or so. OEMs don't get Windows for free, and they pass that cost on to the customer.
If I purchase a computer with an OS installed, I want them to tell me what the root (or equivalent) password is. And I don't expect them to set a different one on each unit. I always have the option of changing it if the system is not physically secured.
That said, I think they would have been wiser to chmod the source code to o+r, create a non-privileged account on the system, and publish that password to satisfy the GPL.
What's with all these languages that start with 'p'? perl, python, php, not to mention good old pascal, and now prothon. Is there a joke here that I'm missing?
Don't forget Pike, Postscript, Prolog, POP11, Prograph, Proteus, Pliant, PL/I, and (the one that started it all) Plankalkuel.
It's probably just the law of averages in action. There are only 26 (or so, depending on the human language) letters to start with, and many hundreds of programming languages out there. But I would be a little suspicious of any new web-scriting language that starts with P, wondering if they chose the name to get in on the LAMP acronym (where P stands for one of the popular open scripting langauges).
The other thing I found that was interesting was the introduction of using the case of the first char of a variable to signify the scope.. That would take some getting used to I suppose..
Not too difficult if you're old enough to remember Fortran's first-letter-of-the-variable-name requirements. Not high on my own list of "quaint ideas to revive".
I've gone back and forth between business and academic employment a couple times, and I don't think you can necessarily generalise between the two worlds. My first corporate job was dull and stifling, wearing a tie everyday, etc. My first academic job was a much more relaxed and enjoyable place. The second corporate job was pretty similar to that, though. Now I'm back working for academia, and while it's officially a very casual work environment, there's a hidden framework of structured job duties, and rules and restrictions. Not at all what I expected from my first time in academia.
The pattern here (from this sample size of 4) seems to be that the size and "culture" of the place matter more than the category. The first college was fairly small (and small-town) and the second business was quite small, to the point that I got to do lots of different things on a day to day basis, and I had some real control over my own job and the tech I used. The first business and the second college are (at least by my standards) huge places where you could never get to know everyone* by name, which means that bureaucracy and politics have to step in to manage relationships rather than personal trust and respect.
Size and such being equal, I do think working for academia beats working for business. It may not be pervasive, but there's a respect for thought and exploration in colleges that businesses don't have much use for. And the intangible of knowing that you're helping to educate people (rather than helping to sell insurance or make kitchen appliances) is nice as well. Just don't expect it to be paradise only because it's an ivory tower.
* I'm not even counting students... one thing you may be surprised by is just how little student contact a typical non-faculty college employee has. I can go days without even speaking to a student here, which is disappointing. (At least in my first college job I had a window overlooking one of the main walkways, so I at least got to enjoy the scenery.) So it's really not much different from being a commuter student in that respect.
Heh one domain? You're lucky. I host 5 and handle email for all of them.
I'll see your 5 and raise you another 7. A few of those are actual paying customers; the rest are a personal domain, domains I and some friends use to do business with, and a few domains I host as freebies for organisations I like. This scheme would make the cut of my gross income that I give to Uncle Sam (and his state and local nephews) seem rather small in comparison... and at least for that I get free police service, road construction, and tobacco subsidies. For this I'd get nothing I don't currently have.
If only there were a pattern so we could learn something from this.
If only there were any context to this, so you could learn something meaningful from it.
Rail transit is so feeble because it's been undercut by huge government spending on roads. Public transit systems were deliberately hobbled because they posed an obstable for the then-growing US automotive industry.
The overpricing of pharmaceuticals is due to patent-guaranteed monopolies; the only ways to combat that are to the full libertarian route (no patents... not gonna happen) or the regulatory route (works pretty well elsewhere).
And the current telecom situation is hardly the result of "overregulation", but the chaos of badly deregulating a market with entrenched local monopolies.
I guess when they talk about supporting "states' rights" they don't really mean the devolution of authority from the central government to more local ones. They just mean that the states have all the rights.
Have you tried searching for that domain in RegEdit? Could be tucked away in an obscure reg key.
One half-solution would be to but a bogus entry for that domain in your c:\windows\system32\drivers\etc\hosts file (point it to Google's IP address, or to 127.0.0.1 and run a tiny http server with a blank page, or something), so the browser wouldn't actually get to that site.
Or the usual solution for fixing chronic Windows problems: reinstall the OS.;)
At home, it's/web/tvb/[not-telling].html, a page with links to my regular sites and often-used resources like Google, IMDB, etc. That directory is an alias to one of the virtual hosts my web server, so I can sit down at any machine on the net with a browser, type in toddverbeek.com/[not-telling].html, and be "at home". Granted, it's not especially secure, which is why I'm not divulging the actual filename and I make a habit of purging the URL history when using other people's machines. But it's not like I have links to boy-porn or disloyal-to-the-president sites on it... and it's darn handy.
Each tool dock creates its own entry which causes clutter.
I despise this aspect of the GIMP, but 2.0* looks to be better, by putting toolsets together on docks using tabs (like Adobe and Macromedia products do), rather than creating a new taskbar entity for every last one. Working with the default setup, my taskbar has: the console window {shrug}, the main GIMP, Layers/Channels..., and one item for each open image file. Which I can deal with... might even get used to it.
* at least this is true of the Windows version, which is what I've just installed on my box here at work.
Because I mounted a small power supply, motherboard, and a hard drive in a FedEx box, as an easier-to-carry alternative to a 1U case (nice and flat, but way too wide and deep) or a typical desktop/tower case (too, well... box-like). As an added bonus, it's less likely to get stolen because it doesn't exactly look like a computer. Though I do have to be careful any time FedEx comes to pick up a package. {grin}
If you want to add, "13. Open source enables companies and nations to become more independent," that's fine. It's true.
But it doesn't in any way invalidate Andreessen's comment #5 about the unique status of the United States, and how that also factors into the popularity of open-source software. Countries are not generic; they are specific. And the specific example of the United States has some specific baggage attached to it. So it's not only "national independence" in general that causes other countries to look at open-source software. It's also (in many cases) a desire for independence from the United States. Acknowledging that is neither stupid nor divisive; it's facing the truth.
It's analogous in many ways to the software industry within the States. Many of the people who avoid Microsoft software also avoid products from Apple, Sun, Palm, etc. because they don't want to be become dependent on those companies for proprietary software. That's the phenomenon you wanted Andreessen to describe. But others avoid Microsoft software simply because it's Microsoft and don't mind getting locked into developers that they happen to trust. That's more like his point, and just as real.
If the main alternative to OSS were French proprietary software, then anti-French sentiments would certainly factor into it. But it's not, so the question of how people feel about France has no influence on the popularity of OSS.
"Open source benefits from anti-X sentiment" is only true for values of X in which X is a country which produces the majority of proprietary software on the international market.
People in parts of the world that are not the United States are often uncomfortable becoming dependent on the U.S., and by implication, proprietary software that is only available from a single U.S. source. Open-source software is typically international in origin, and also free from U.S. control.
At the more extreme end, you may have noticed that some people in parts of the world that are not the United States very actively dislike the U.S. and want to avoid supporting it by buying software from us. Open-source software - even if Made In America - can be obtained without enriching the U.S.
The "100%" part of the statement may not be accurate (and the "known" part is a weakness as well), but the "false positive" part is important. The point is that this can be implemented without any danger of upsetting or inconveniencing your users or management, as compared to something that does have false positives (like spam blocking) which will periodically "lose" a legitimate e-mail message.
Slashdot Mirror
The kind that you wouldn't be able to detect (except maybe by careful monitoring of the sun with a well-filtered telescope pointed at exactly the right spot). Imagine something much smaller than the moon and even farther away passing in front of the sun. That's what this is.
To experience a solar eclipse from a temporary sattelite would be a once-in-a-lifetime experience.
If it were noticeable. But temporary satellites (like the ISS) cast (highly-attenuated) shadows on the Earth every day.
This plug-in is kinda funny, and I hope the Mozilla folks can take a joke and enjoy the laugh. But treating "the criticism that Mozilla has received from its most recent choice of name" as if it were a serious issue suggests that the submitter of this article could stand to lighten up and look around. The vast majority of Browser Formerly Known As users seem to have taken to the the name "Firefox" pretty well. As the album cover says: 205,000 Google hits for "firefox browser" can't be wrong.
Sure they did. Just not at their own expense. The GPL says, "You may charge a fee for the physical act of transferring a copy." This clause was included to avoid creating a hardship for developers back when "providing the source" might mean shipping another mag tape overseas (which used to be even more costly than today). But if someone showed up on your doorstep with their own tape (or perhaps if they sent it to you return-postage paid), you'd be obligated to give them a copy free of any fee. The clear implication of this clause is that it's not to be a for-profit transaction, or limited to certain people who've paid you money for a licence... which is what is usually meant by "a paying customer". So in that sense, the parent should be modded -1, Disinformative.
Him, and everyone else who bought a computer from HPaq, Dell, Gateway, etc. in the past decade or so. OEMs don't get Windows for free, and they pass that cost on to the customer.
That said, I think they would have been wiser to chmod the source code to o+r, create a non-privileged account on the system, and publish that password to satisfy the GPL.
I bet it's already happened.
Look again.
The XML is "embedded".
Don't forget Pike, Postscript, Prolog, POP11, Prograph, Proteus, Pliant, PL/I, and (the one that started it all) Plankalkuel.
It's probably just the law of averages in action. There are only 26 (or so, depending on the human language) letters to start with, and many hundreds of programming languages out there. But I would be a little suspicious of any new web-scriting language that starts with P, wondering if they chose the name to get in on the LAMP acronym (where P stands for one of the popular open scripting langauges).
Not too difficult if you're old enough to remember Fortran's first-letter-of-the-variable-name requirements. Not high on my own list of "quaint ideas to revive".
{puzzled} You say that as if it were a bad thing.
The pattern here (from this sample size of 4) seems to be that the size and "culture" of the place matter more than the category. The first college was fairly small (and small-town) and the second business was quite small, to the point that I got to do lots of different things on a day to day basis, and I had some real control over my own job and the tech I used. The first business and the second college are (at least by my standards) huge places where you could never get to know everyone* by name, which means that bureaucracy and politics have to step in to manage relationships rather than personal trust and respect.
Size and such being equal, I do think working for academia beats working for business. It may not be pervasive, but there's a respect for thought and exploration in colleges that businesses don't have much use for. And the intangible of knowing that you're helping to educate people (rather than helping to sell insurance or make kitchen appliances) is nice as well. Just don't expect it to be paradise only because it's an ivory tower.
* I'm not even counting students... one thing you may be surprised by is just how little student contact a typical non-faculty college employee has. I can go days without even speaking to a student here, which is disappointing. (At least in my first college job I had a window overlooking one of the main walkways, so I at least got to enjoy the scenery.) So it's really not much different from being a commuter student in that respect.
I'll see your 5 and raise you another 7. A few of those are actual paying customers; the rest are a personal domain, domains I and some friends use to do business with, and a few domains I host as freebies for organisations I like. This scheme would make the cut of my gross income that I give to Uncle Sam (and his state and local nephews) seem rather small in comparison... and at least for that I get free police service, road construction, and tobacco subsidies. For this I'd get nothing I don't currently have.
If only there were any context to this, so you could learn something meaningful from it.
I guess when they talk about supporting "states' rights" they don't really mean the devolution of authority from the central government to more local ones. They just mean that the states have all the rights.
How did you cope when Yahoo changed the bgcolor from yellow to white?
One half-solution would be to but a bogus entry for that domain in your c:\windows\system32\drivers\etc\hosts file (point it to Google's IP address, or to 127.0.0.1 and run a tiny http server with a blank page, or something), so the browser wouldn't actually get to that site.
Or the usual solution for fixing chronic Windows problems: reinstall the OS. ;)
At home, it's /web/tvb/[not-telling].html, a page with links to my regular sites and often-used resources like Google, IMDB, etc. That directory is an alias to one of the virtual hosts my web server, so I can sit down at any machine on the net with a browser, type in toddverbeek.com/[not-telling].html, and be "at home". Granted, it's not especially secure, which is why I'm not divulging the actual filename and I make a habit of purging the URL history when using other people's machines. But it's not like I have links to boy-porn or disloyal-to-the-president sites on it... and it's darn handy.
I despise this aspect of the GIMP, but 2.0* looks to be better, by putting toolsets together on docks using tabs (like Adobe and Macromedia products do), rather than creating a new taskbar entity for every last one. Working with the default setup, my taskbar has: the console window {shrug}, the main GIMP, Layers/Channels..., and one item for each open image file. Which I can deal with... might even get used to it.
* at least this is true of the Windows version, which is what I've just installed on my box here at work.
The TRS-80's I used at school (Model I & III) were housed in black and grey plastic.
Because I mounted a small power supply, motherboard, and a hard drive in a FedEx box, as an easier-to-carry alternative to a 1U case (nice and flat, but way too wide and deep) or a typical desktop/tower case (too, well... box-like). As an added bonus, it's less likely to get stolen because it doesn't exactly look like a computer. Though I do have to be careful any time FedEx comes to pick up a package. {grin}
But it doesn't in any way invalidate Andreessen's comment #5 about the unique status of the United States, and how that also factors into the popularity of open-source software. Countries are not generic; they are specific. And the specific example of the United States has some specific baggage attached to it. So it's not only "national independence" in general that causes other countries to look at open-source software. It's also (in many cases) a desire for independence from the United States. Acknowledging that is neither stupid nor divisive; it's facing the truth.
It's analogous in many ways to the software industry within the States. Many of the people who avoid Microsoft software also avoid products from Apple, Sun, Palm, etc. because they don't want to be become dependent on those companies for proprietary software. That's the phenomenon you wanted Andreessen to describe. But others avoid Microsoft software simply because it's Microsoft and don't mind getting locked into developers that they happen to trust. That's more like his point, and just as real.
"Open source benefits from anti-X sentiment" is only true for values of X in which X is a country which produces the majority of proprietary software on the international market.
At the more extreme end, you may have noticed that some people in parts of the world that are not the United States very actively dislike the U.S. and want to avoid supporting it by buying software from us. Open-source software - even if Made In America - can be obtained without enriching the U.S.
The "100%" part of the statement may not be accurate (and the "known" part is a weakness as well), but the "false positive" part is important. The point is that this can be implemented without any danger of upsetting or inconveniencing your users or management, as compared to something that does have false positives (like spam blocking) which will periodically "lose" a legitimate e-mail message.