"Possible" yes. It's an open secret that it's already possible to bit-for-bit copy ebooks, DVDs etc. Does it say they have to make it possible for you to legally use your copy?
Suppose you have created an encrypted FS for yourself, and it could be broken into if Lucent knew exactly how it worked.
Uh, bad example: security through obscurity... do I have to elaborate? Relying on a hidden algorithm for security is as bad as hardwiring a password in your source code files.
Yes, that's an interesting issue. However, even setting a BIOS password isn't foolproof, because a BIOS password can be bypassed if you have physical access to the machine for a sufficient amount of time (e.g. to take out the battery, take out the hard drive, etc.).
Why would you suck cycles that could be used for computation for data visualization?
Obvious answer: You typically run code on a supercomputer only if it would be too slow when run on a slower computer. (Don't know if that's the case here - might be just a convenience thing.)
If you're running 270000 copies of Linux, it would be more ethical to donate some sizeable amount to a nonprofit foundation that contributed / is contributing a lot, like the FSF - as well as paying the distributor.
Actually, there is a registry hack to enable security configuration for "My Computer". But it's so annoying I wouldn't recommend it. As you browse around your HD in explorer it keeps warning you about ActiveX controls (i.e. explorer's built-in file displaying stuff. It's stupid.
Not a well written paragraph from an Economics point of view.
To analyse the situation correctly, you have to take into account both abstract economics and the concrete facts of physical limits to oil production. Hubbert's Peak: The Coming World Oil Crisis is a good book to read on this.
Because people think that energy companies are some mysterious mafia-style organization in cahoots with the government that is hell bent on maintaining oil at the cost of logic and economics.
No, this is not as far fetched as it might sound. They do conspire with the Bush oil administration, but this is not illogical from a self-interested point of view. Oil is still one of the most profitable industries around - up there with pharmaceuticals and "defense" (i.e. weapons production). Attempting to sustain that level of profit is not illogical, it's just protecting their shareholders "right to profit"... (excuse me while I puke).
No Java is not open source. You are not free to modify it and distribute your changes. Read the Open Source Definition at www.opensource.org.
Re:One little problem - reference system
on
Time Travel
·
· Score: 1
you would be in space, as the earth would not have moved around it's orbit to your location yet.
Incorrect. You are tacitly assuming the existence of an absolute reference frame in which the earth moves. How can you make this assumption? I would guess, as a layman (and not having read the paper), that the time travel would be like ordinary movement but reversing the time direction, so that you would tend to stay on earth in roughly the same place.
The Patent Office isn't charged with ensuring that the patents are valid.
What are they then? Expensive rubber-stampers?
In other words, if they aren't supposed to check that the patent's even valid [*], what the hell are they doing?
[*] Note: by valid I mean useful, non-obvious and innovative. I don't include whether it works or not. But that should be irrelevant because if you patent a process or machine that doesn't work, who cares? Of course the patent office now allows the patenting of vague ideas, which makes a mockery of the whole system.
i have at least given a laymans browse through some networking code and from my opinion(a programming student) the *nix kernel and general code of the *nix's does not haven more defense against hacking...
Haven more defense? Speak English boy!
You have them mixed up. O(N) (which that algorithm is, technically, if you ignore the range) isn't constant time, it's linear time. O(1) is constant time.
However, this is one case in which the "constant" factor (the range) is likely to outweigh the actual O(N) factor, so the O(N) notation is misleading. (The range isn't really constant of course - if you wanted to include that you could call it O(N+M)).
Thanks for the algorithm though!
Re:with things like this happening
on
Spy v. Spy
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
What I'm talking about is when people download the CodeWeaver CrossOver plugin,
Yes but CodeWeavers employs some of the Wine developers. At the moment they are basically just selling free software with a wrapper on top to fund Wine development. I really don't see them bundling hidden spyware with Crossover or anything like that - it would be all over Slashdot the next day.
(Disclaimer: I am a satisfied CodeWeavers customer.)
Re:Grounds for divorce.
on
Spy v. Spy
·
· Score: 1
You can just install Muffin - it's open source, runs on every platform that runs Java 1.1 or higher, and it's quite user-friendly to set up. Here's my personal blocklist (not perfect but it works for me):
If it's on a different port to port 80, the ISP wouldn't necessarily do HTTP caching, because not all ports carry HTTP traffic (I know this is a little hard to understand for those who think the web == the internet...).
This is why we instroduce the notion of a universal turing machine (UTM), which along with the input on the tape, takes in the description of a machine M. The UTM can go on then to simulate M on the rest of the contents of the input tape. A universal turing machine can thus simulate any other machine.
A UTM could be in principle implemented in hardware (but not in practice - a UTM cannot be implemented in practice, period). In this case it would not make sense to require that the encoding of its input was the same as the encoding of itself, since this UTM is not a program, it's a device!
Secondly, I thought SK was functional and the Turing machine is imperative? Non-trivial paradigm mismatch here?
Slashdot Mirror
Uh, bad example: security through obscurity... do I have to elaborate? Relying on a hidden algorithm for security is as bad as hardwiring a password in your source code files.
Oh wait a minute...
Obvious answer: You typically run code on a supercomputer only if it would be too slow when run on a slower computer. (Don't know if that's the case here - might be just a convenience thing.)
To analyse the situation correctly, you have to take into account both abstract economics and the concrete facts of physical limits to oil production. Hubbert's Peak: The Coming World Oil Crisis is a good book to read on this.
No, this is not as far fetched as it might sound. They do conspire with the Bush oil administration, but this is not illogical from a self-interested point of view. Oil is still one of the most profitable industries around - up there with pharmaceuticals and "defense" (i.e. weapons production). Attempting to sustain that level of profit is not illogical, it's just protecting their shareholders "right to profit"... (excuse me while I puke).
The license agreement may specifically allow it, as long as the software is not being used simultaneously on both.
Incorrect. You are tacitly assuming the existence of an absolute reference frame in which the earth moves. How can you make this assumption? I would guess, as a layman (and not having read the paper), that the time travel would be like ordinary movement but reversing the time direction, so that you would tend to stay on earth in roughly the same place.
What are they then? Expensive rubber-stampers?
In other words, if they aren't supposed to check that the patent's even valid [*], what the hell are they doing?
[*] Note: by valid I mean useful, non-obvious and innovative. I don't include whether it works or not. But that should be irrelevant because if you patent a process or machine that doesn't work, who cares? Of course the patent office now allows the patenting of vague ideas, which makes a mockery of the whole system.
I've read the trilogy, but I'm not sure who you're referring to. Who is the Satan figure in His Dark Materials?
However, this is one case in which the "constant" factor (the range) is likely to outweigh the actual O(N) factor, so the O(N) notation is misleading. (The range isn't really constant of course - if you wanted to include that you could call it O(N+M)).
Thanks for the algorithm though!
Yes but CodeWeavers employs some of the Wine developers. At the moment they are basically just selling free software with a wrapper on top to fund Wine development. I really don't see them bundling hidden spyware with Crossover or anything like that - it would be all over Slashdot the next day.
(Disclaimer: I am a satisfied CodeWeavers customer.)
options reg-icase
kill doubleclick.net
kill ads.nwsource.com
kill images.slashdot.org/banne
kill ads.x10.com
kill goatse.cx
Since when?
You learn something new every day.
Secondly, I thought SK was functional and the Turing machine is imperative? Non-trivial paradigm mismatch here?