"Ouch! You can certainly do reverse engineering for fair use purposes like writing interoperable software or playing the game you legally bought without a CD."
It depends on the validity of the EULA. If the EULA's have any validity at all, you usually cannot.
This is soviet technology. You need to read the fine print -- "Researchers say that the greatest difficulty will be with the reading of information".
That's great!
Let me tell you about the new hard drive method I created for storing large amounts of data on your hard drive. It allows you to write more than 10x the amount your hard drive already contains. In fact I've already installed it with Linux computers. Just copy the files to/dev/null. The only issue is that researchers are having some difficulty reading the information after its stored, but we don't think its that big of a problem.
Don't forget that the first parameter is a structure with 75 members, the first of which is the size of the structure itself, and you have to zero out the whole structure before using it to avoid accidentally switching on a feature you didn't want.
I currently teach DirectX. I would use SDL if anyone put out a halfway-decent introduction to game programming using SDL.
Think of it this way, if Aqua were built _on top_ of the legacy MacOS system, MacOS X would have sucked royally. Instead, since Aqua was built on its own, it can be optimized for itself, rather than having to navigate many layers underneath.
You are indeed correct. Found a good article on IIS security here. Looks like Microsoft is finally taking cues from Apache on how to design a webserver.
I'm probably not going to take the time to do it, but if it is going to say that seed for Eve was used differently than for other women, that is still bad theology because other instances in the Old Testament seed is used for women in the same way as it is used for man. See Genesis 16:7.
"The fact that Perl is useful in practice (I use it all the time) because it has lots of libraries and ports doesn't change the fact that its foundations are poorly thought out."
I think that it's useful in practice because it makes the job easier on the programmer. It also allows the programmer to bend it to his style. I can put the "if"s wherever they make sense, rather than having every statement look the same.
In fact, I can even ust use the latin language instead of writing Perl. Remember, Perl was developed by a linguist, not a computer scientist. Larry is an expert in how people think and communicate, and thus his language reflects that quite well.
I'm a scheme fan, but I must say as a programmer I _love_ Perl's syntax. You may think I'm crazy, but Perl seems to have all of the tools a programmer needs for day-in-day-out tasks. I _like_ list vs scalar context. I _like_ multiple return values (though scheme has that through a SRFI). I _like_ the regex syntax embedded into the language. I _like_ the transmutation between the different scalar types. Why? These are all the little things that allow me to write killer programs in just a few lines of code.
No, because its like cancer. Cancer is part of me, and I have the right to do whatever with me that I want to. Likewise, sperm is just part of me. However, when a sperm meets and egg, it forms a third entity, a new life.
When the abortion discussion took place in the capitol in the 80's, every doctor who took the stand agreed that (a) fetuses were alive, and (b) were unique individuals (as apposed to part of the parents). The only disagreement was to the value of that life.
"All relevant issues have been extensively debated."
Not out in the open. Unfortunately, I think our present news system prevents a priori the possibility of open, public debates. The closest you get are shouting matches, or just summaries which completely miss the major points made by both sides.
"but I think that those who do it should act with the utmost respect and reverence for life which is probably what most in the life sciences do anyway."
If you've had any experience with medical doctors, this is definitely not the case. Your local pediatrician will have respect and reverance, but the specialists and researchers generally do not.
Speaking of clone rights,there's a good sci-fi book called Clone Hunter which tells the story of a world where cloning is available but illegal, where clones become people without consciences. Anyway, it's a real interesting and exciting read (it's an action/adventure story), with a good political/moral commentary.
The question is, is it ethical to kill life and intentionally create deformed life in order to save other life? Specifically, creating and killing human life? At what point is something human?
Remember the last time humanity did research on humans which were not considered "real" humans. I think we called it the holocaust.
My son would benefit greatly, but I think the ethical implications are more important. Why? Because if you fail to consider ethical questions, then things like using the disabled for experimentation becomes routine. One of our doctors tried to do that. It was clear that he wouldn't be able to survive the entrance criteria (required fasting for 48 hours), but the doctor wanted him to participate in the study.
"To me, at least, I find this approach much more suitable then asking around, having other people tell me what is the best way, searching the web, and so on."
But there's no ethical questions with that. That _is_ the best way to go from a research standpoint, but the question at issue is ethics.
"Are embryonic sciences that much different; do scientists really need to hear what other people have to say before poking around, discovering how it works, researching it, get a basic example working?"
Yes, because they are likely to accidentally kill whatever they are poking on in the early stages. When you are playing with your computer, noone is likely to die as a result of your tinkering.
When my father-in-law decided to go into computers, I told him to buy an iBook. It was the smartest move I ever made. Now he's laughing about PC users' problems, and I don't have to do tech support.
I've found the general CORBA framework to be pretty simple, and even taught it in a C++ intro class. There's a lot of details, but that's true of any well-thought-out system. Often times complaints of "complexity" are actually complaints about something being well thought out. Attempts to "simplify" just bring about evil things like SOAP, which, despite it's acronym is not simple, has nothing to do with objects, and isn't even a specced out protocol. "access" is the only part of its name that isn't a complete fabrication.
Slashdot Mirror
"Ouch! You can certainly do reverse engineering for fair use purposes like writing interoperable software or playing the game you legally bought without a CD."
It depends on the validity of the EULA. If the EULA's have any validity at all, you usually cannot.
This is soviet technology. You need to read the fine print -- "Researchers say that the greatest difficulty will be with the reading of information".
/dev/null. The only issue is that researchers are having some difficulty reading the information after its stored, but we don't think its that big of a problem.
That's great!
Let me tell you about the new hard drive method I created for storing large amounts of data on your hard drive. It allows you to write more than 10x the amount your hard drive already contains. In fact I've already installed it with Linux computers. Just copy the files to
Don't forget that the first parameter is a structure with 75 members, the first of which is the size of the structure itself, and you have to zero out the whole structure before using it to avoid accidentally switching on a feature you didn't want.
I currently teach DirectX. I would use SDL if anyone put out a halfway-decent introduction to game programming using SDL.
I don't know any programming languages. I just read code and "do likewise" :)
Think of it this way, if Aqua were built _on top_ of the legacy MacOS system, MacOS X would have sucked royally. Instead, since Aqua was built on its own, it can be optimized for itself, rather than having to navigate many layers underneath.
You are indeed correct. Found a good article on IIS security here. Looks like Microsoft is finally taking cues from Apache on how to design a webserver.
But in that case you are talking about two exploits, not just one.
Local exploits on Windows are not even taken seriously.
That's simiple. If you exploit apache, you get guest access, and if you exploit IIS, you get admin access.
In addition, if you chroot apache, then not only do you just get guest access, you can't even see most of the filesystem.
I'm probably not going to take the time to do it, but if it is going to say that seed for Eve was used differently than for other women, that is still bad theology because other instances in the Old Testament seed is used for women in the same way as it is used for man. See Genesis 16:7.
"The fact that Perl is useful in practice (I use it all the time) because it has lots of libraries and ports doesn't change the fact that its foundations are poorly thought out."
I think that it's useful in practice because it makes the job easier on the programmer. It also allows the programmer to bend it to his style. I can put the "if"s wherever they make sense, rather than having every statement look the same.
In fact, I can even ust use the latin language instead of writing Perl. Remember, Perl was developed by a linguist, not a computer scientist. Larry is an expert in how people think and communicate, and thus his language reflects that quite well.
I'm a scheme fan, but I must say as a programmer I _love_ Perl's syntax. You may think I'm crazy, but Perl seems to have all of the tools a programmer needs for day-in-day-out tasks. I _like_ list vs scalar context. I _like_ multiple return values (though scheme has that through a SRFI). I _like_ the regex syntax embedded into the language. I _like_ the transmutation between the different scalar types. Why? These are all the little things that allow me to write killer programs in just a few lines of code.
Your biblical theology is incorrect. The bible regards the woman as having seed as well, as far back as Genesis 3.
In fact, the prophesy in Genesis 3 is actually linking Jesus to the seed of woman.
I think you are making up a straw man (quite literally) and foisting it upon a group of people you don't like.
No, because its like cancer. Cancer is part of me, and I have the right to do whatever with me that I want to. Likewise, sperm is just part of me. However, when a sperm meets and egg, it forms a third entity, a new life.
When the abortion discussion took place in the capitol in the 80's, every doctor who took the stand agreed that (a) fetuses were alive, and (b) were unique individuals (as apposed to part of the parents). The only disagreement was to the value of that life.
"All relevant issues have been extensively debated."
Not out in the open. Unfortunately, I think our present news system prevents a priori the possibility of open, public debates. The closest you get are shouting matches, or just summaries which completely miss the major points made by both sides.
"but I think that those who do it should act with the utmost respect and reverence for life which is probably what most in the life sciences do anyway."
If you've had any experience with medical doctors, this is definitely not the case. Your local pediatrician will have respect and reverance, but the specialists and researchers generally do not.
And giving the rest of the world a taste of freedom.
Speaking of clone rights,there's a good sci-fi book called Clone Hunter which tells the story of a world where cloning is available but illegal, where clones become people without consciences. Anyway, it's a real interesting and exciting read (it's an action/adventure story), with a good political/moral commentary.
The question is, is it ethical to kill life and intentionally create deformed life in order to save other life? Specifically, creating and killing human life? At what point is something human?
Remember the last time humanity did research on humans which were not considered "real" humans. I think we called it the holocaust.
My son would benefit greatly, but I think the ethical implications are more important. Why? Because if you fail to consider ethical questions, then things like using the disabled for experimentation becomes routine. One of our doctors tried to do that. It was clear that he wouldn't be able to survive the entrance criteria (required fasting for 48 hours), but the doctor wanted him to participate in the study.
"To me, at least, I find this approach much more suitable then asking around, having other people tell me what is the best way, searching the web, and so on."
But there's no ethical questions with that. That _is_ the best way to go from a research standpoint, but the question at issue is ethics.
"Are embryonic sciences that much different; do scientists really need to hear what other people have to say before poking around, discovering how it works, researching it, get a basic example working?"
Yes, because they are likely to accidentally kill whatever they are poking on in the early stages. When you are playing with your computer, noone is likely to die as a result of your tinkering.
When my father-in-law decided to go into computers, I told him to buy an iBook. It was the smartest move I ever made. Now he's laughing about PC users' problems, and I don't have to do tech support.
I told my wife she could either switch to Linux or not have tech support. She's been a happy Linux user ever since.
I've found the general CORBA framework to be pretty simple, and even taught it in a C++ intro class. There's a lot of details, but that's true of any well-thought-out system. Often times complaints of "complexity" are actually complaints about something being well thought out. Attempts to "simplify" just bring about evil things like SOAP, which, despite it's acronym is not simple, has nothing to do with objects, and isn't even a specced out protocol. "access" is the only part of its name that isn't a complete fabrication.
But first you have to decide the ethical standards for doing the tests, which seems to have been long overlooked.
Watch out, it's the Loop Nest Monster!