You know, it doesn't seem that funny. After all, which trees are going to survive for a hundred million years? The ones whose charcoal protects the rest of the tree from being burnt, or the one whose charcoal explodes with the force of a billion suns? (which I assume is the only other choice)
I expect there will be a breaking point in the next few years - maybe Longhorn will be it. It will take another 5-10 years, but MS will slowly stop selling new stuff and start foundering as everyone moves to open source.
Another ten years, half their "warchest", and three presidents later, they will rise from their ashes like a phoenix, actually innovating and producing worthwhile stuff.
It seems to be a cycle with companies like that - their hubris gets the best of them, but since they have the money to wait out the dark times, they emerge as a large company with large resources *and* a belated sense of ethics (if only to keep their customers happy)
I noticed a few months back that the quote works just as well in reverse, when applied to Microsoft supporters. I remember the days anyone suggesting MS was the better choice was viciously attacked by "zealots".
Now it seems the zealots have for the most part disappeared, and cooler heads are prevailing (not too much though, this is/. after all). When you see an MS-friendly post, more often than not the result is condesending, or outright laughing at the poster. Linux supporters no longer have to be on the defensive.
"Doing it right" not only refers to completing the task, but doing it efficiently enough that a "normal" person could conceivably afford it. That's one goal governments seem to have problems attaining.
Absolutely. When you view it on your own "pirated" version, then you edit your doc normally. If you view it on any other computer (using stuff like directory structure to determine if it's a different computer), you get a picture of tubgirl. That way if you're using it to learn the software/just for fun, then go for it. The second you try to distribute/use it commercially... Welll, I doubt you'd get many repeat customers.
Note: You're the most well-spoken debator I've heard on either side of the issue in a long time.
But I think you're working on an incorrect idea.
The idea is this: that the subjugation of a country is the way to prevent this "Panislamic" state from coming into being.
When the world is divided into "Us or Them", it will become increasingly polarized. If muslims see the attack of Iraq as an attempt to attack muslims in general (which is what you're implying), that will show them that they have to band together to prevent any more of "their territories" from being taken.
Look at it from an Arab perspective. The US has attacked two of "your" countries in a span of a year.
Again, you seem the intelligent sort. If you really believe that the new threat is a PanIslamic state, I think you're advocating the wrong strategy.
And plastic pipe for plumbing was held back in British Columbia for a few years because it took a fraction of the time to install compared to the old (copper?) pipes, thus making plumbers less money.
FTP or HTTP, both of which are like the "fascist dicatorships of transfer protocols"...
What did you think FTP stood for?
Whatcha smokin?
on
Game with God
·
· Score: 2, Informative
Tell that to Augustine or Galileo, some of the greatest minds were devout followers of the church.
'The good Christian should beware of mathematicians and all those who make empty prophecies. The danger already exists that mathematicians have made a covenant with the devil to darken the spirit and confine man in the bonds of Hell.' - St. Augustine
If privacy policies can't be enforced since people don't read them and hence "expectation of privacy is low", are EULAs unenforcable since companies know people don't read them?
I'm afraid you misunderstand me - I didn't think it was funny at all. But the pun was out there, and my fingers had typed it before my brain could stop them.
Thanks for that completely useless analysis that doesn't even do us the favor of showing us the actual benchmark code.
You've done a great job of putting down our anonymous friend. I myself was absolutely horrified that he was interested enough in the problem that he would go to the trouble to benchmark the problem of all things, and document the actual effects. Oh! The horror!
I've had this question in mind for a while, perhaps someone here can answer it. As I understand, most of the helium in the world is found in deposits in the US. Since helium is incredibly light and inert (won't combine with other elements to make heavier matter) - is there a chance we could run out?
Not to interrupt your rant - I have no doubt this guy was as incompetent as you describe. But I'm going to defend his practice and say that using $array[key] is absolutely understandable.
PHP is the only language I've used that forces you to index arrays differently in code and string context.
Code:
print ($array['key']);
String:
print ("$array[key]");// Note no quotes around "key"
What the hell is that? While I try to follow the guidelines as described above, I wouldn't place blame on anyone for getting confused. Especially considering the fact that the $array[key] syntax is only discouraged. Not using it will not adversely affect any script in any version of PHP as of this writing, and keeps the syntax consistent across code and string contexts.
If you object to a contract, don't agree to it. Period.
Why not? If I buy a CD that clearly says on the outside "By buying this, you agree not to make any copies, even a backup" - I have no problem buying it and making a backup. If they find out and want to take me to court, I believe they'll find that my actions are well within the confines of fair use. Now I both have the item I wanted, and I have successfully evaded their the terms of their "contract".
In other words, if you don't agree to the terms of the contract, there are plenty of other ways to register your disagreement without denying yourself the use of the product/service.
In any case, there is *still* a difference between disagreeing legally and philosophically. I may agree that the 99 cents is worth the terms they've offered, but still disagree that those terms "make the world a better place", and work to undermine their usefulness. These aren't mutually exclusive.
Not only that - the terms may not be legal in all areas of the world, in which case it's quite legal to agree to the terms and simply ignore them.
That's a bit of a leap of logic. If the contract said "and we get your firstborn son", he could have a philosophical objection to that without being against the idea of enforcable contracts. In other words, he objects to the terms of the contract, not the contract itself.
while click throughs are arguable, payment definitely constitutes agreement Just because he legally agrees doesn't mean he philosophically agrees. Just because he accepts terms he doesn't agree with - terms he can't escape when buying music online - doesn't invalidate his beliefs.
Perhaps someone should have done a better job anglicizing the name - don't laugh at people pronouncing a word the way it's spelled.
Languages like German in which they also use the Latin alphabet I can understand some discrepency between spelling and pronunciation. But there's no reason for a name that's never been spelled out in English before to be anything less than perfectly phonetic (at least as close as our language will get to the actual pronunciation)
Slashdot Mirror
Charcoal is funny enough a fire retardent.
You know, it doesn't seem that funny. After all, which trees are going to survive for a hundred million years? The ones whose charcoal protects the rest of the tree from being burnt, or the one whose charcoal explodes with the force of a billion suns? (which I assume is the only other choice)
Since when is Saudi Arabia a warzone?
No, but it comes with a free frogurt!
I expect there will be a breaking point in the next few years - maybe Longhorn will be it. It will take another 5-10 years, but MS will slowly stop selling new stuff and start foundering as everyone moves to open source.
Another ten years, half their "warchest", and three presidents later, they will rise from their ashes like a phoenix, actually innovating and producing worthwhile stuff.
It seems to be a cycle with companies like that - their hubris gets the best of them, but since they have the money to wait out the dark times, they emerge as a large company with large resources *and* a belated sense of ethics (if only to keep their customers happy)
I noticed a few months back that the quote works just as well in reverse, when applied to Microsoft supporters. I remember the days anyone suggesting MS was the better choice was viciously attacked by "zealots".
/. after all). When you see an MS-friendly post, more often than not the result is condesending, or outright laughing at the poster. Linux supporters no longer have to be on the defensive.
Now it seems the zealots have for the most part disappeared, and cooler heads are prevailing (not too much though, this is
Many of my friends could have cared less.
No they couldn't
"Doing it right" not only refers to completing the task, but doing it efficiently enough that a "normal" person could conceivably afford it. That's one goal governments seem to have problems attaining.
The end consumer could care less...
No they couldn't
Hermes: We're jerked! Nothing can stop a monster that big!
Farnsworth: Nothing except and even equally big monster.
Absolutely. When you view it on your own "pirated" version, then you edit your doc normally. If you view it on any other computer (using stuff like directory structure to determine if it's a different computer), you get a picture of tubgirl. That way if you're using it to learn the software/just for fun, then go for it. The second you try to distribute/use it commercially... Welll, I doubt you'd get many repeat customers.
I think you're working on an incorrect idea.
Note: You're the most well-spoken debator I've heard on either side of the issue in a long time.
But I think you're working on an incorrect idea.
The idea is this: that the subjugation of a country is the way to prevent this "Panislamic" state from coming into being.
When the world is divided into "Us or Them", it will become increasingly polarized. If muslims see the attack of Iraq as an attempt to attack muslims in general (which is what you're implying), that will show them that they have to band together to prevent any more of "their territories" from being taken.
Look at it from an Arab perspective. The US has attacked two of "your" countries in a span of a year.
Again, you seem the intelligent sort. If you really believe that the new threat is a PanIslamic state, I think you're advocating the wrong strategy.
And plastic pipe for plumbing was held back in British Columbia for a few years because it took a fraction of the time to install compared to the old (copper?) pipes, thus making plumbers less money.
No real comment, but this seemed topical
The Inner Light
FTP or HTTP, both of which are like the "fascist dicatorships of transfer protocols"...
What did you think FTP stood for?
Tell that to Augustine or Galileo, some of the greatest minds were devout followers of the church.
'The good Christian should beware of mathematicians and all those who make empty prophecies. The danger already exists that mathematicians have made a covenant with the devil to darken the spirit and confine man in the bonds of Hell.' - St. Augustine
If privacy policies can't be enforced since people don't read them and hence "expectation of privacy is low", are EULAs unenforcable since companies know people don't read them?
several physicians (including myself)
I've noticed your sig a number of times - can I now consider it sound medical advice?
I'm afraid you misunderstand me - I didn't think it was funny at all. But the pun was out there, and my fingers had typed it before my brain could stop them.
Thanks for that completely useless analysis that doesn't even do us the favor of showing us the actual benchmark code.
You've done a great job of putting down our anonymous friend. I myself was absolutely horrified that he was interested enough in the problem that he would go to the trouble to benchmark the problem of all things, and document the actual effects. Oh! The horror!
I've had this question in mind for a while, perhaps someone here can answer it. As I understand, most of the helium in the world is found in deposits in the US. Since helium is incredibly light and inert (won't combine with other elements to make heavier matter) - is there a chance we could run out?
PHP is the only language I've used that forces you to index arrays differently in code and string context.
Code: String: What the hell is that? While I try to follow the guidelines as described above, I wouldn't place blame on anyone for getting confused. Especially considering the fact that the $array[key] syntax is only discouraged. Not using it will not adversely affect any script in any version of PHP as of this writing, and keeps the syntax consistent across code and string contexts.
If you object to a contract, don't agree to it. Period.
Why not? If I buy a CD that clearly says on the outside "By buying this, you agree not to make any copies, even a backup" - I have no problem buying it and making a backup. If they find out and want to take me to court, I believe they'll find that my actions are well within the confines of fair use. Now I both have the item I wanted, and I have successfully evaded their the terms of their "contract".
In other words, if you don't agree to the terms of the contract, there are plenty of other ways to register your disagreement without denying yourself the use of the product/service.
In any case, there is *still* a difference between disagreeing legally and philosophically. I may agree that the 99 cents is worth the terms they've offered, but still disagree that those terms "make the world a better place", and work to undermine their usefulness. These aren't mutually exclusive.
Not only that - the terms may not be legal in all areas of the world, in which case it's quite legal to agree to the terms and simply ignore them.
That's a bit of a leap of logic. If the contract said "and we get your firstborn son", he could have a philosophical objection to that without being against the idea of enforcable contracts. In other words, he objects to the terms of the contract, not the contract itself.
while click throughs are arguable, payment definitely constitutes agreement
Just because he legally agrees doesn't mean he philosophically agrees. Just because he accepts terms he doesn't agree with - terms he can't escape when buying music online - doesn't invalidate his beliefs.
Perhaps someone should have done a better job anglicizing the name - don't laugh at people pronouncing a word the way it's spelled.
Languages like German in which they also use the Latin alphabet I can understand some discrepency between spelling and pronunciation. But there's no reason for a name that's never been spelled out in English before to be anything less than perfectly phonetic (at least as close as our language will get to the actual pronunciation)
care to list what we bribed Poland, Great Britain, Spain or Australia with?
I hope it wasn't reduced trade barriers, because they lose.