If there had been 256byte paragraphs, we would have had to live with segmented memory much longer. Thank god it died soon! Nothing is more annoying than pointers that consist of two parts. Well, being chased by Steve Ballmer in a room filled with chairs probably is, but you get the point.
I didn't make it past the first three or four paragraphs, but no PHB is going to read further either. Court cases over GPL violation show that you can't use open source software the way you please? If he thought that before he's a moron and probably a sociopath. And the article seems to go on in that vein.
... and with no further data to the contrary you would assume that Canadian users are just like other facebook users, i.e. if they're 10% of the facebook population, they constitute 10% of Facebook's value.
There was no implementation of standard C++ when C++ was standardized. There was no implementation of standard C when C was standardized. There was no implementation of Fortran 90 / 95 / 2003 when Fortran 90 / 95 / 2003 were standardized. This is fairly common for standards: after all one of the reasons for having standards is to have diverging impementations converge again. Not standardizing one of the existing implementations puts no vendor at an advantage and is therefore bound to happen if different vendors sit at the table negotiating.
How would you suggest I measure an object in its rest frame? The usual procedure is to have it decay and then look at the momenta and energies of the decay particles to determine the invariant mass of the original particle.
From how I read the post, Creative licensed code from third parties only for XP, not Vista. Since this code is needed to use certain functionality, this functionality is disabled on Vista. In other words, Creative's bad negotiating comes to bite their customers in the ass. How could they be this stupid -- "oh, we only licensed this stuff for Windows XP? Too bad, let the customers suck it up"
According to the article, if they hadn't looked at famous people's records, they wouldn't have gotten caught. In other words it's common for these contractors to look at various people's passport records, only these few were stupid enough to choose to snoop after famous people besides their usual routine of checking on their neighbors, unfaithful spouses, the girl they're stalking, etc.
It can say it but it'd be lying; with GPLv3 the pact becomes worthless. You may want to check the facts again. The GPLv3 explicitly didn't include provisions that apply retroactively, as would be the case in the Novell patent agreement. The GPLv3 authors did so because of this agreement.
Most open source projects' commits are already gathered on cia.navi.cx. I don't see what ohioh can add besides a link to the real name, which is easy enough to find out anyway.
The question is not "are sexual offenders more dangerous than other offenders?", the question is, who can we stigmatize with the people's support. The advantage to New Jersey of having this legislation is that sex offenders will be more likely to leave the state, as they can't work any office jobs there any longer. The disadvantage to every other state is that they might well fall out of all security rosters.
Given the prior art on the old patent, I tend to doubt there was an inventive step (i.e. it wasn't non-obvious) in the 'invention'. Of course this is much harder to prove, so Amazon can unfortunately count on getting awaay with it.
Why don't they simply carry their passports around, making sure that they get a stamp everytime they enter or leave a compartment? They should also set up extradition treaties in case the American murderer of the Russian cosmonaut hides in the Japanese compartment. Of course, if he manages to reach the American compartment, where he can't be extradited, the Russians may decide to decompress the station, which would force the murderer into the Russian escape pod. Sounds like a space soap opera, and more beneficial to humankind than all this research jabberjibber that noone understands.
I'm not going to link to it, because I don't want this hobby project to go up in flames, but if you follow the links to the website of the guy who built it, you would find that he's actually running a webserver on it.
Since the audio on vinyl can't be compressed to such extremes...
This guy doesn't know what he is talking about. Why? It is a fact that the louder the pressing, the heavier the distortion due to the mechanical limitations in the needle following the groove. If you press it a lower average volume level but keep the spikes in (i.e. with lower dynamic range compression which is the kind of compression we're probably talking about), you can reduce distortion and thus get a better sound and keep a high dynamic range. This way, you may well end up with a higher dynamic range than your average Red Hot Chili Peppers record (though one should mention that the low dynamic range of Californication is due to making it a mono recording essentially, thus doing away with the need for space for different volumes on both channels)
They put this under his picture in the first article that is linked to:
Political activist Richard Stallman spoke against the resolution "Digital Restrictions Management should be illegal" at a Yale Political Union debate Wednesday night. The article got it right, though. Thay appear somewhat confused, maybe because RMS shattered their beliefs?
How is Sun's policy any different than the FSF's policy for GNU projects they manage? I'm curious about this myself. When I assigned some of my copyrights to the FSF I got a contract that says amongst other things that even though the FSF holds the copyright, they won't use all of their rights to the code, by guaranteeing that they will only distribute it under the terms of free software licenses (this is defined in some way, I could look the specifics up if anybody is interested).
If Sun doesn't have a clause like this, I don't see why anybody, especially any commercial entity would ever sign away their copyrights to Sun. Otherwise Sun could e.g. sell parts of OO (say ODF support) to Microsoft, weakening any contributor's (and thus competitor's) position in the process.
I'm living in Munich. I don't know a single person who's in favor of the Transrapid. I'd love to know one, because I haven't ever heard a convincing argument in favor of this connection.
There are essentially two arguments in favor of the Transrapid: 1) it will make all the world want to buy this fancy German technology, as it will show everybody how viable and useful it is. 2) it will make the ride to the airport much faster, as the ride from the central station will become much faster.
Re 1): that's fairly hypothetical, and I don't buy it. People havent's started wanting the Transrapid after the one in Shanghai turned out a success. Also several other tracks in Germany were deemed not worth doing. Why would that be different elsewhere. Re 2): Using the transrapid will first mean getting to the transrapid. That means getting to the central station, and from there getting to this new track, which certainly means a walk of several minutes, as it won't be one of the existing tracks. Now if you're living in the north of Munich, there's no need to go to the central station to get to the airport, as the current train stops in the north of munich. If you're living in Munich's east or west, there's no need to go to the central station, as the current train lines stop in the east (Ostbahnhof) and west (Pasing), respectively. Only if you live in the south, you may benefit from from this faster connection. If you're coming from outside Munich, your train will stop in Pasing, where you can change to the current airport train, saving you the ten minutes it takes to get from Pasing to the central station, and therefore the transrapid.
In other words, the speed benefit from building the transrapid affects only a small percentage of the people wanting to get to the airport. If they built the suggested express train alternative (i.e. a train that only stops in Pasing and in the places where the track connects to the subway), there would be no gain left, unless your trip starts from the central station.
The transrapid is Edmund Stoiber's gift to himself before retiring from his job as Bavarian prime minister. It doesn't make sense.
The man doesn't know when to keep his mouth shut or how to be civil. It looks like (thankfully) people in the OpenBSD project are telling him to shut the fuck up and let them handle things:
I stopped making public statements in the recent controversy because Eben Moglen started working behind the scenes to 'improve' what Linux people are doing wrong with licensing, and he asked me to give him pause, so his team could work.
I'm surprised noone corrected you so far, given that Eben Moglen was the subjected of several/. stories already. Eben Moglen is the FSF's lawyer. He's not associated with OpenBSD.
Or rather, he was the FSF's lawyer until the release of the GPLv3, which he co-wrote. Now he's the head of the Software Freedom Law Center, but he's still closely associated with the FSF and the GPL.
Can somebody explain to me why votes need to be timestamped? The only purpose I can think of is that this allows cross-correlation with the actual votes. You don't even need the info on the order in which people voted, as you could just stand in front of the election place with a watch. This sounds like a definite failure at maintaining basic democratic principles.
So yes, banks do take care of your customers. If yours doesn't, why are you still banking there? No, your example doesn't show that they take care of the customer, they take care of themselves. they made the mistake, they had to pay. In this particular case their interestes matched the customers.
Slashdot Mirror
If there had been 256byte paragraphs, we would have had to live with segmented memory much longer. Thank god it died soon! Nothing is more annoying than pointers that consist of two parts. Well, being chased by Steve Ballmer in a room filled with chairs probably is, but you get the point.
I didn't make it past the first three or four paragraphs, but no PHB is going to read further either. Court cases over GPL violation show that you can't use open source software the way you please? If he thought that before he's a moron and probably a sociopath. And the article seems to go on in that vein.
... and with no further data to the contrary you would assume that Canadian users are just like other facebook users, i.e. if they're 10% of the facebook population, they constitute 10% of Facebook's value.
Isn't that the argument you were trying to make in the grandfather post?
There was no implementation of standard C++ when C++ was standardized. There was no implementation of standard C when C was standardized. There was no implementation of Fortran 90 / 95 / 2003 when Fortran 90 / 95 / 2003 were standardized. This is fairly common for standards: after all one of the reasons for having standards is to have diverging impementations converge again. Not standardizing one of the existing implementations puts no vendor at an advantage and is therefore bound to happen if different vendors sit at the table negotiating.
NB I'm not saying that OOXML is a good standard.
The irony of this is that your post will never receive the editors' attention because they browse at +5.
What a great excuse that makes.
"Guys, why are all of you in the smoking area?" - "Computer told us."
"Guys, shouldn't you be patroling places other than the women's changing rooms?" - "Sorry, computer told us."
"Guys, don't tell me the computer told you to play poker" - "No, but he sure is a tough player."
Here's another webpage that uses color very efficiently to transport an important message link
From how I read the post, Creative licensed code from third parties only for XP, not Vista. Since this code is needed to use certain functionality, this functionality is disabled on Vista. In other words, Creative's bad negotiating comes to bite their customers in the ass. How could they be this stupid -- "oh, we only licensed this stuff for Windows XP? Too bad, let the customers suck it up"
According to the article, if they hadn't looked at famous people's records, they wouldn't have gotten caught. In other words it's common for these contractors to look at various people's passport records, only these few were stupid enough to choose to snoop after famous people besides their usual routine of checking on their neighbors, unfaithful spouses, the girl they're stalking, etc.
It can say it but it'd be lying; with GPLv3 the pact becomes worthless. You may want to check the facts again. The GPLv3 explicitly didn't include provisions that apply retroactively, as would be the case in the Novell patent agreement. The GPLv3 authors did so because of this agreement.
Most open source projects' commits are already gathered on cia.navi.cx. I don't see what ohioh can add besides a link to the real name, which is easy enough to find out anyway.
The question is not "are sexual offenders more dangerous than other offenders?", the question is, who can we stigmatize with the people's support. The advantage to New Jersey of having this legislation is that sex offenders will be more likely to leave the state, as they can't work any office jobs there any longer. The disadvantage to every other state is that they might well fall out of all security rosters.
For instance, Wolfram labeled the function given above as Rule 2, and gave the intuitive 7-symbol representation
f(p,q,r) = (not p) and (not q) and r
while Georgiadis gave a 6-symbol representation
So Wolfram doesn't know Morgan's rule?f(p,q,r) = r and not (p or q)
Given the prior art on the old patent, I tend to doubt there was an inventive step (i.e. it wasn't non-obvious) in the 'invention'. Of course this is much harder to prove, so Amazon can unfortunately count on getting awaay with it.
Why don't they simply carry their passports around, making sure that they get a stamp everytime they enter or leave a compartment? They should also set up extradition treaties in case the American murderer of the Russian cosmonaut hides in the Japanese compartment. Of course, if he manages to reach the American compartment, where he can't be extradited, the Russians may decide to decompress the station, which would force the murderer into the Russian escape pod. Sounds like a space soap opera, and more beneficial to humankind than all this research jabberjibber that noone understands.
I'm not going to link to it, because I don't want this hobby project to go up in flames, but if you follow the links to the website of the guy who built it, you would find that he's actually running a webserver on it.
This guy doesn't know what he is talking about. Why? It is a fact that the louder the pressing, the heavier the distortion due to the mechanical limitations in the needle following the groove. If you press it a lower average volume level but keep the spikes in (i.e. with lower dynamic range compression which is the kind of compression we're probably talking about), you can reduce distortion and thus get a better sound and keep a high dynamic range. This way, you may well end up with a higher dynamic range than your average Red Hot Chili Peppers record (though one should mention that the low dynamic range of Californication is due to making it a mono recording essentially, thus doing away with the need for space for different volumes on both channels)
If Sun doesn't have a clause like this, I don't see why anybody, especially any commercial entity would ever sign away their copyrights to Sun. Otherwise Sun could e.g. sell parts of OO (say ODF support) to Microsoft, weakening any contributor's (and thus competitor's) position in the process.
I'm living in Munich. I don't know a single person who's in favor of the Transrapid. I'd love to know one, because I haven't ever heard a convincing argument in favor of this connection.
There are essentially two arguments in favor of the Transrapid:
1) it will make all the world want to buy this fancy German technology, as it will show everybody how viable and useful it is.
2) it will make the ride to the airport much faster, as the ride from the central station will become much faster.
Re 1): that's fairly hypothetical, and I don't buy it. People havent's started wanting the Transrapid after the one in Shanghai turned out a success. Also several other tracks in Germany were deemed not worth doing. Why would that be different elsewhere.
Re 2): Using the transrapid will first mean getting to the transrapid. That means getting to the central station, and from there getting to this new track, which certainly means a walk of several minutes, as it won't be one of the existing tracks. Now if you're living in the north of Munich, there's no need to go to the central station to get to the airport, as the current train stops in the north of munich. If you're living in Munich's east or west, there's no need to go to the central station, as the current train lines stop in the east (Ostbahnhof) and west (Pasing), respectively. Only if you live in the south, you may benefit from from this faster connection. If you're coming from outside Munich, your train will stop in Pasing, where you can change to the current airport train, saving you the ten minutes it takes to get from Pasing to the central station, and therefore the transrapid.
In other words, the speed benefit from building the transrapid affects only a small percentage of the people wanting to get to the airport. If they built the suggested express train alternative (i.e. a train that only stops in Pasing and in the places where the track connects to the subway), there would be no gain left, unless your trip starts from the central station.
The transrapid is Edmund Stoiber's gift to himself before retiring from his job as Bavarian prime minister. It doesn't make sense.
The man doesn't know when to keep his mouth shut or how to be civil. It looks like (thankfully) people in the OpenBSD project are telling him to shut the fuck up and let them handle things:
I stopped making public statements in the recent controversy because
I'm surprised noone corrected you so far, given that Eben Moglen was the subjected of severalEben Moglen started working behind the scenes to 'improve' what Linux
people are doing wrong with licensing, and he asked me to give him
pause, so his team could work.
Or rather, he was the FSF's lawyer until the release of the GPLv3, which he co-wrote. Now he's the head of the Software Freedom Law Center, but he's still closely associated with the FSF and the GPL.
Can somebody explain to me why votes need to be timestamped? The only purpose I can think of is that this allows cross-correlation with the actual votes. You don't even need the info on the order in which people voted, as you could just stand in front of the election place with a watch. This sounds like a definite failure at maintaining basic democratic principles.