That was the problem. He tried to unzip her in front of their child process and she gave him the finger for not waiting for a nicer time. Now he's sleeping in/tmp, and expecting to lose his fortune because she's now lseeking a fork in the marriage.
I'm of the opinion that much of the Vista-specific bloat comes from the DRM layer. Under the DRM paradigm, every driver doesn't just have to worry about doing their normal work -- it also has to worry about doing some, apparently innocuous, thing that pisses off some other random driver (or, eve, program) in the system. It also has to worry about whether it is required to get 'pissed off' by what some other random element is doing.
That constant looking-over-the-shoulder (both your own and others') has got to result in a lot of the lost performancethat is being seen in Vista.
Linux (ne. Unix) was generally designed by engineers -- not marketing droids (who seem to have designed most of Windows). The upshot is that security is a bit easier to implement because basic system functionality was well designed to begin with. The other nice thing is that there is pleasantly little 'cruft' that came from the old system(s) that aren't still quite usable (and used) in the new system.
By contrast, every new version of Windows seems to throw out huge chunks of the old system, and replace them with (often similarly ill-considered) 'new and improved' chunks -- and there are parts of Windows that are a side-effect of intentional mines put in to trip up competitors' products. Much of that weirdness has now been entrenched into Windows because Windows developers have been forced to work around and/or use those same logic-bombs.
SCO may have had nothing, but they sued about everything.
The problem with Microsoft taking the SCO path, however, is that -- when it looks like the suit is about to tank, declaring bankruptcy to avoid the final trial would only result in a charge of mass-murder (when the entire federal bankruptcy court dies laughing).
So that's whats going to happen when the Mayan calender rolls over in 2012. We're talking Geological time here. The universe doesn't turn over until the 64th long count which, by my calculations, would be 324950.
In Cosmological time, that's as close as we'll get to 'in the blink of an eye'.
The point isn't being geek, it's being recognized as a geek (by non-geeks) that would make him useful -- and, especially in Norway, I think that he'd do a really good job of that.
Being fair and objective is not the same as not having an opinion. What is expected is to separate your opinion from your duties as chair. This is why and how the protocol of (temporarily) stepping down from the chair to express your opinion became the standard method for a chair to express his/her opinion. That way, the chair isn't able to use the powers of the chair to, for example, allow himself extra time to speak, or to speak out of turn.
I spent too much time ROTFL at the concept of a secure Microsoft product -- especially a first-release.
Oh -- and it uses your Windows Live ID All of your medical, financial and communications information under one Microsoft password (if MS has their way).
It's enough to give me a heart attack.
If this situation is really as messed up as seems to be implied by the article, perhaps it would be appropriate for Finland's most famous geek to say a bit about what's been going on?
Perhaps they were hoping that one of the thousands of/. readers would understand Finnish and be able to write in English -- and be willing to do a human translation of the whole article (since the machine translations I've been able to generate have been atrocious).
What he said was said on the record, but he had to temporarily step down as Chairman so that people were clear that he was speaking as a private citizen not as the chairman of the committee.
As the chairman of the committee, he was responsible for shepherding and implementing the decisions of the committee.
As a private citizen he had a good deal of experience and an opinion about which way he would have liked the decision to go.
It is actually standard practice, in this situation, to do precisely what he did.
It is also standard practice, in any real democracy for someone to have an opinion that doesn't jive with that of the majority. The expression of that dissent is not (and should not be), per se, grounds for any sort of retaliation. Unless there was something in his speech that was completely inappropriate that was not mentioned or aluded to in the article, then I would be inclined to say that his firing was very, very bad news for the standards process in Finland.
Cinepaint does 16 bit, which I'm now starting to find MUCH more useful, as I now have a RAW capable digital camera.
I really do wish that the Cinepaint and GIMP would de-fork. There is SO much good stuff in GIMP that's not in Cinepaint, and vice-versa (and that includes expertise). Keeping them separate seems stoopid!
Despite that fact, if the hardware mod works and apple wilfully bricks it, for no reason other than to increase their profits, they are wilfully destroying my property. That's a clear tort in most courts and probably even the kind of thing that would result in serious punitive damages.
"Unauthorized use" might be things like taking your sports care racing on dirt roads. This isn't unauthorized use. This is apple willfully inducing flaws into their machine so that it breaks. People have already installed this software, and now apple is making these -- perfectly functional machines 'spuriously' break. That's not my fault. It's Apples, and they're bound to fix it.
Although most of the constitutional rights that one refers to mostly only limit congress, it seems to have been agereed to, a long time ago, that these rights also bind lower levels of government. My understanding of the history of US constitutional law isn't strong enough to say exactly why -- but it makes perfect sense... otherwise your right to, say free speech, be free from unreasonable search and seizure or cruel and unusual punishment could be violently infringed by state or local governments. I think that this was done with a constitutional amendment, but I'm not entirely sure.
... the Supreme Court is supreme only over other federal courts - not over the other branches of government". It's not a case of court vs court. It's a case of judge vs constitution.
The constitution explicitly bans the establishment of a state religion -- and that's for a purpose. It seems fine when when you agree with the state religion, but it really sucks when the slippery slope gets so steep that you're persecuted for not believing in the same god as the (current) government does. Imagine if Utah had a $100/day head tax for non-Mormons, and the surrounding states retaliated with a $100/day tax for being Mormon. Imagine it then going downhill from there... There are many times in history when people were Killing each other over which religious sect held sway (from the later roman empire, to the British wars of succession to modern-day Iraq).
Many of the framers of the constitution were (children of) religious refugees.
They weren't anti-religious. Quite to the contrary -- you have to have a very strong faith to pull up stakes and move to a wild continent rather than just silently put up with the current political fad in religiousity. The point of the separation of church and state was that they wanted to be able to partake in their own brand of devout religion, independent of the (often fake) piosity of the current President/Governor.
The presumption of the cameras was that they would make it easier to solve crimes. Knowledge that doing anything 'bad' would almost certainly get you thrown in jail was presumed to be the stick which would stop crime in the area.
Now, if more cameras leads to an effective drop in arrests, then these cameras are going to do sweet bugger all to stop people from doing the nasty in public.
Comparing crime rates doesn't do much because it's to be presumed that they'll put more cameras into places with high crime rates (even if they don't do any good).
The other thing that I'll point out is that, if cameras really helped to deter crime, you'd have rich and well-connected people lobbying their next-door elected officials to have these cameras put up in their neighbourhood.
Notice that that's not happening? That's probably more empirically damning than the stats listed in TFA.
lesse, 10,000 cameras for £200M, That would be wholey freaking business plan, Batman, thats £20,000 per camera! This is a bigtime profit center for the people involved in it.
(either that, or the stats are somehow whacked).
The point of the bankruptcy was to halt to halt the SCO/Novell lawsuit before judge Kimball could pronounce just how much of the SUN/Microsoft royalty deals actually belonged to Novell. In the meantime they claim that the state of that money -- being a Schrodinger's cat problem, means that it all belongs in the hands SCO until the appropriate division is (never) determined. If, however, SCO never makes it out of bankruptcy, Novell can (SCO hopes) be denied both their money and the answers to questions like "who really wanted you to run this kamikaze scam?" which might be in some internal SCO documents.
Then don't complain when someone needs a few hundred bucks, more than you need a PORTABLE INTERNET COMMUNICATIONS DEVICE!!!!! The guy had a gun. If he really needed the money, he could have sold the gun.
Slashdot Mirror
That was the problem. He tried to unzip her in front of their child process and she gave him the finger for not waiting for a nicer time. Now he's sleeping in /tmp, and expecting to lose his fortune because she's now lseeking a fork in the marriage.
I'm of the opinion that much of the Vista-specific bloat comes from the DRM layer. Under the DRM paradigm, every driver doesn't just have to worry about doing their normal work -- it also has to worry about doing some, apparently innocuous, thing that pisses off some other random driver (or, eve, program) in the system. It also has to worry about whether it is required to get 'pissed off' by what some other random element is doing.
That constant looking-over-the-shoulder (both your own and others') has got to result in a lot of the lost performancethat is being seen in Vista.
By contrast, every new version of Windows seems to throw out huge chunks of the old system, and replace them with (often similarly ill-considered) 'new and improved' chunks -- and there are parts of Windows that are a side-effect of intentional mines put in to trip up competitors' products. Much of that weirdness has now been entrenched into Windows because Windows developers have been forced to work around and/or use those same logic-bombs.
(( Sigh. Some things just never change. ))
The problem with Microsoft taking the SCO path, however, is that -- when it looks like the suit is about to tank, declaring bankruptcy to avoid the final trial would only result in a charge of mass-murder (when the entire federal bankruptcy court dies laughing).
In Cosmological time, that's as close as we'll get to 'in the blink of an eye'.
The point isn't being geek, it's being recognized as a geek (by non-geeks) that would make him useful -- and, especially in Norway, I think that he'd do a really good job of that.
Being fair and objective is not the same as not having an opinion. What is expected is to separate your opinion from your duties as chair. This is why and how the protocol of (temporarily) stepping down from the chair to express your opinion became the standard method for a chair to express his/her opinion. That way, the chair isn't able to use the powers of the chair to, for example, allow himself extra time to speak, or to speak out of turn.
Oh -- and it uses your Windows Live ID All of your medical, financial and communications information under one Microsoft password (if MS has their way).
It's enough to give me a heart attack.
If this situation is really as messed up as seems to be implied by the article, perhaps it would be appropriate for Finland's most famous geek to say a bit about what's been going on?
Perhaps the article is in Swedish, or something?
As the chairman of the committee, he was responsible for shepherding and implementing the decisions of the committee.
As a private citizen he had a good deal of experience and an opinion about which way he would have liked the decision to go.
It is actually standard practice, in this situation, to do precisely what he did.
It is also standard practice, in any real democracy for someone to have an opinion that doesn't jive with that of the majority. The expression of that dissent is not (and should not be), per se, grounds for any sort of retaliation. Unless there was something in his speech that was completely inappropriate that was not mentioned or aluded to in the article, then I would be inclined to say that his firing was very, very bad news for the standards process in Finland.
Cinepaint does 16 bit, which I'm now starting to find MUCH more useful, as I now have a RAW capable digital camera. I really do wish that the Cinepaint and GIMP would de-fork. There is SO much good stuff in GIMP that's not in Cinepaint, and vice-versa (and that includes expertise). Keeping them separate seems stoopid !
IANAL. Deal with it.
"Unauthorized use" might be things like taking your sports care racing on dirt roads. This isn't unauthorized use. This is apple willfully inducing flaws into their machine so that it breaks. People have already installed this software, and now apple is making these -- perfectly functional machines 'spuriously' break. That's not my fault. It's Apples, and they're bound to fix it.
Although most of the constitutional rights that one refers to mostly only limit congress, it seems to have been agereed to, a long time ago, that these rights also bind lower levels of government. My understanding of the history of US constitutional law isn't strong enough to say exactly why -- but it makes perfect sense... otherwise your right to, say free speech, be free from unreasonable search and seizure or cruel and unusual punishment could be violently infringed by state or local governments. I think that this was done with a constitutional amendment, but I'm not entirely sure.
The constitution explicitly bans the establishment of a state religion -- and that's for a purpose. It seems fine when when you agree with the state religion, but it really sucks when the slippery slope gets so steep that you're persecuted for not believing in the same god as the (current) government does. Imagine if Utah had a $100/day head tax for non-Mormons, and the surrounding states retaliated with a $100/day tax for being Mormon. Imagine it then going downhill from there... There are many times in history when people were Killing each other over which religious sect held sway (from the later roman empire, to the British wars of succession to modern-day Iraq).
Many of the framers of the constitution were (children of) religious refugees.
They weren't anti-religious. Quite to the contrary -- you have to have a very strong faith to pull up stakes and move to a wild continent rather than just silently put up with the current political fad in religiousity. The point of the separation of church and state was that they wanted to be able to partake in their own brand of devout religion, independent of the (often fake) piosity of the current President/Governor.
"Do no evil", and all that ...
Now, if more cameras leads to an effective drop in arrests, then these cameras are going to do sweet bugger all to stop people from doing the nasty in public.
Comparing crime rates doesn't do much because it's to be presumed that they'll put more cameras into places with high crime rates (even if they don't do any good).
The other thing that I'll point out is that, if cameras really helped to deter crime, you'd have rich and well-connected people lobbying their next-door elected officials to have these cameras put up in their neighbourhood.
Notice that that's not happening? That's probably more empirically damning than the stats listed in TFA.
lesse, 10,000 cameras for £200M, That would be wholey freaking business plan, Batman, thats £20,000 per camera! This is a bigtime profit center for the people involved in it.
(either that, or the stats are somehow whacked).
Perhaps we can re-activate George Bush's commission and make him a test pilot?
The point of the bankruptcy was to halt to halt the SCO/Novell lawsuit before judge Kimball could pronounce just how much of the SUN/Microsoft royalty deals actually belonged to Novell. In the meantime they claim that the state of that money -- being a Schrodinger's cat problem, means that it all belongs in the hands SCO until the appropriate division is (never) determined. If, however, SCO never makes it out of bankruptcy, Novell can (SCO hopes) be denied both their money and the answers to questions like "who really wanted you to run this kamikaze scam?" which might be in some internal SCO documents.