The closed source implementation of Java is not really suitable for open source work on Linux unless you want to hand the keys to Linux to Sun.
That's hyperbole.
The Microsoft-dominated CLR is not really suitable for open source on Linux either - unless you want to make your software dependent on Microsoft's API - which may have "proprietary extensions" added at any time.
Re-read the post I originally replied to. A businessman will stop lying once he's made a profit, but a bureaucrat will never stop lying?? What kind of lame-ass naivety is that?
Woah, 3 anonymous cowards in a row. Why the reticence to create an account come from? Could it be that all three posts are by the same nutball, perhaps? Nah...
That's not encouraged - it creates extra work. Not much, but it mounts up over hundreds of bugs.
PLEASE, PLEASE, use the Vote For This Bug link instead of submitting known duplicates. The search isn't psychic so dups are inevitable, but let's try to keep them to a minimum.
If no-one knew about them, maybe you should file that bug!
You seem to have a very thin skin. Flaming is a fact of life on the Internet, but just because you got flamed once does not mean you'll get flamed by everyone.
No, not really. All valuable assets will be put into administration and auctioned off to the highest bidder.
It will be interesting to see what happens though. Perhaps because of the high maintenance costs, there will be no buyers for parts of the network. If so then I don't know what the legal status for those parts would be...
What exactly is your problem?? So if you run a "possibly commercial" email list from within the EU, you'll have to implement confirmed opt-in for your email, and include an unsubscribe link in each email. Modern email list management software can already do both of these things. Big f-ing deal. I mean, this is trivial to implement.
I suppose you think there should be no seatbelt or motorcycle helmet laws either? If anything they're more "onerous" than this law.
The complaint was not that saying that was dangerous, but that it was God-awfully stupid to say that. Can you tell the difference?
You appear to have blindly missed the point in pursuit of a knee-jerk bashing "political correctness".
Sometimes people make statements which are very politically incorrect but which are astute - such as, for example, Bill Maher's statement that the September 11 terrorists were "not cowards", because they died for their cause. (He was merely criticising politicians who used the word "cowardly" to describe the Sep 11 attacks - but not in any way condoning terrorism.) By contrast, it is b>fatuous to suggest that burning up all the world's oil supplies in an instant, thus releasing massive quantities of CO2, is the ultimate dream of the typical environmentalist - let alone Environmentalism as a movement.
The complaint was not that saying that was dangerous, but that it was God-awfully stupid to say that. Can you tell the difference?
You appear to have blindly missed the point in pursuit of bashing "political correctness".
Sometimes people make statements which are very politically incorrect but which are astute - such as, for example, Bill Maher's statement that the September 11 terrorists were "not cowards", because they died for their cause. (He was merely criticising politicians who used the word "cowardly" to describe the Sep 11 attacks - but not in any way condoning terrorism.) By contrast, it is b>fatuous to suggest that burning up all the world's oil supplies in an instant, thus releasing massive quantities of CO2, is the ultimate dream of the typical environmentalist - let alone Environmentalism as a movement.
As a conspiracy theorist myself, I have to say, (a) that's quite plausible as conspiracy theories go, and (b) the point is not so much about whether you or I should know about alternative browsers, but whether the average web user should be forced to switch browsers just because popup ad companies are being abusive.
Er, I think you'll find that Einstein didn't publish his ideas on special relativity until they were good and ready. The fact that Wolfram's book took so longer than expected to come out, shows he was still revising it for a long time - and what on earth is wrong with wanting to make sure your ideas are polished before publishing them? Given the perceived significance of this book, it makes perfect sense to me that he wouldn't want anything too significant to leak out ahead of time - especially if it contained mistakes!
Peer review comes now. To suggest that there will be no peer review, with Wolfram's book currently #1 on Amazon.com, is beyond ludicrous. If he had published it posthumously, now that might fairly be described as "exhiling himself from scholarly debate".
or claim that any initial skepticism about his ideas was evidence that they were right.
Maybe not - but Einstein did say something to the effect of "if experiments don't agree with me, experiments are wrong" - which is far more arrogant on the face of it. However, perhaps he was just joking.
Email a random mpeg from your downloads directory to all your addressbook, then corrupt (not delete) all your data files, while alternating between displaying an unclosable window with goatse.cx and a satanic picture with "your computer has been possessed" overlayed on it. And, for the icing on the cake, "upgrade" your BIOS and/or CPU microcode so that your machine is unbootable.
Since the program has no built-in calls to antivirus software
Uh, this lame virus is actually an ordinary exe file. So any decent antivirus program should be able to stop it, given an updated pattern file. No hooks needed into Kazaa, unless it launches exe files in a very weird way.
Also, you or I (well I know I could, not sure if you are a programmer or not)could build (copy, clone, duplicate) MS Office.
I think you might find it quite hard. Look at the size of Open Office. Then consider that MS Office file formats are documented poorly or not at all, and that's the big stumbling block.
Alan Cox clearly doesn't understand copyright -- what is that baloney about it being invented by oppressive regimes for censor?
No, he's right. You just aren't aware of the history of copyright.
Copyright was something an author sold a publisher, and didn't exist in any form, really, until it got put in the American constitiution.
That's breathtakingly wrong. Americans invented copyright? I love this "oh no-one had ever heard of X until Americans invented it" view you USians have.
For instance, he shows an example of the Sieve of Eratosthenes as a Cellular Automaton. Big deal.
Clearly no-one of the stature of Wolfram would try to claim that the Sieve of Eratosthenes is original per se. It's just a simple example of an algorithm. I think that would come under the "examples of what CAs can do" part of the book, not the "fundamentally new discoveries" part.
Slashdot Mirror
That's hyperbole.
The Microsoft-dominated CLR is not really suitable for open source on Linux either - unless you want to make your software dependent on Microsoft's API - which may have "proprietary extensions" added at any time.
I'd trust Sun over Microsoft any day.
What battiness "libertarianism" produces!
PLEASE, PLEASE, use the Vote For This Bug link instead of submitting known duplicates. The search isn't psychic so dups are inevitable, but let's try to keep them to a minimum.
You seem to have a very thin skin. Flaming is a fact of life on the Internet, but just because you got flamed once does not mean you'll get flamed by everyone.
It will be interesting to see what happens though. Perhaps because of the high maintenance costs, there will be no buyers for parts of the network. If so then I don't know what the legal status for those parts would be...
I suppose you think there should be no seatbelt or motorcycle helmet laws either? If anything they're more "onerous" than this law.
You appear to have blindly missed the point in pursuit of a knee-jerk bashing "political correctness".
Sometimes people make statements which are very politically incorrect but which are astute - such as, for example, Bill Maher's statement that the September 11 terrorists were "not cowards", because they died for their cause. (He was merely criticising politicians who used the word "cowardly" to describe the Sep 11 attacks - but not in any way condoning terrorism.) By contrast, it is b>fatuous to suggest that burning up all the world's oil supplies in an instant, thus releasing massive quantities of CO2, is the ultimate dream of the typical environmentalist - let alone Environmentalism as a movement.
You appear to have blindly missed the point in pursuit of bashing "political correctness".
Sometimes people make statements which are very politically incorrect but which are astute - such as, for example, Bill Maher's statement that the September 11 terrorists were "not cowards", because they died for their cause. (He was merely criticising politicians who used the word "cowardly" to describe the Sep 11 attacks - but not in any way condoning terrorism.) By contrast, it is b>fatuous to suggest that burning up all the world's oil supplies in an instant, thus releasing massive quantities of CO2, is the ultimate dream of the typical environmentalist - let alone Environmentalism as a movement.
Er, I think you'll find that Einstein didn't publish his ideas on special relativity until they were good and ready. The fact that Wolfram's book took so longer than expected to come out, shows he was still revising it for a long time - and what on earth is wrong with wanting to make sure your ideas are polished before publishing them? Given the perceived significance of this book, it makes perfect sense to me that he wouldn't want anything too significant to leak out ahead of time - especially if it contained mistakes!
Peer review comes now. To suggest that there will be no peer review, with Wolfram's book currently #1 on Amazon.com, is beyond ludicrous. If he had published it posthumously, now that might fairly be described as "exhiling himself from scholarly debate".
or claim that any initial skepticism about his ideas was evidence that they were right. Maybe not - but Einstein did say something to the effect of "if experiments don't agree with me, experiments are wrong" - which is far more arrogant on the face of it. However, perhaps he was just joking.
Email a random mpeg from your downloads directory to all your addressbook, then corrupt (not delete) all your data files, while alternating between displaying an unclosable window with goatse.cx and a satanic picture with "your computer has been possessed" overlayed on it. And, for the icing on the cake, "upgrade" your BIOS and/or CPU microcode so that your machine is unbootable.
That should have the desired effect quite nicely.
Oops, I'm a terrorist now!
Uh, this lame virus is actually an ordinary exe file. So any decent antivirus program should be able to stop it, given an updated pattern file. No hooks needed into Kazaa, unless it launches exe files in a very weird way.
I think you might find it quite hard. Look at the size of Open Office. Then consider that MS Office file formats are documented poorly or not at all, and that's the big stumbling block.
No, he's right. You just aren't aware of the history of copyright.
Copyright was something an author sold a publisher, and didn't exist in any form, really, until it got put in the American constitiution.
That's breathtakingly wrong. Americans invented copyright? I love this "oh no-one had ever heard of X until Americans invented it" view you USians have.
Clearly no-one of the stature of Wolfram would try to claim that the Sieve of Eratosthenes is original per se. It's just a simple example of an algorithm. I think that would come under the "examples of what CAs can do" part of the book, not the "fundamentally new discoveries" part.
Er, not from an email address alone it can't.
Please...
No shit, Sherlock!