The here & now flows from the there & then. That is why the rest of the world is concerned.
All that aside, of course it's a matter for the people of the U.S. to settle on their own.
Having other nations actually vote for your government would be as unjust as the U.S. unilateraly embarking on wars against the wishes of the United Nations. Er...
Yes, what you did in Afghanistan in the 80s was destabilize the region. And twenty years later, it became the REASON you had to go back; to try and fix what you had meddled with in the first place.
And yes, you SHOULD have done nothing, on that we agree. If you hadn't screwed up Afghanistan in the first place, there would have been no 9/11.
Yup, you should have done nothing. I couldn't agree more.
>Tough. It's our vote, not yours. I'm getting really sick of these arrogant Europeans thinking their oppinion in our election even matters.
It would be correct to tell the rest of the world to piss off and mind their own business because the U.S. presidential elections are U.S. business if the U.S. stopped meddling in foreign governments.
Whatever the outcome of this election, it WILL have repercussions on the rest of the world.
THAT'S why the rest of the world feels they must state their opinion, obviously.
Isn't the whole issue of trying to buy the source-code completely moot?
If the code was released under the GPL voluntarily, even the authors of the code can't "take it back" as long as the code is being used under the spirit of the license.
Standard "divide and conquer" by Microsoft and SCO here, move along.
>Instead of revoking "personship" rights from corporations we treat them more fully as "persons". In particular that would include prison sentences for criminal violations, or even for contempt of court. I will leave it up to the reader to dream up suitable means of implementing said prison sentences on corporations.
Still not good enough.
As long as corporations enjoy all the same protections as individuals, the individual with the most amount of cash (the corporation) will ALWAYS win in any fight against individual persons.
Both being equal in the eyes of the law, it will always be a question of who has more resources.
So in a fight between you and Microsoft, for example, Microsoft will always have more lawyers, and will tie you in knots every time, and you will lose.
The law giving individual rights to corporations MUST BE CHANGED!
It's the worm in the apple of American society, and you can even trace almost every terrible problem the U.S. has back to it.
Come on, brave citizens, take back your rights, and REALLY lead the world, by example.
But I am running Linux now, and I am already more pleased with it than I ever was with Windows.
I ran Windows exclusively from 1989 to 2003.
I really believe that the reason for this incredible quality and stability is that the Linux operating system sprang up not as a product like Windows was, but rather as a desire to produce a good operating system.
Come on AT&T, break that old chestnut about how PCs are for business and Macs are only for media creators!
The Mac would be an EXCELLENT choice.
It's easier for users and it's robust.
Of course it costs more.
On the other hand, I suppose if their I.T. department really has their act together, they could find a way to deploy an already-configured-for-their-precise-needs version of Linux too, only that would probably be harder to set up.
Also, it may be prohibitively expensive to go with Macs, because you essentially have to scrap your existing PCs, seeing as how you can't run Mac on PCs (yet)
"Webster's Revised Unabridged Dictionary (1913)" Fact Fact, n. L. factum, fr. facere to make or do. Cf. Feat, Affair, Benefit, Defect, Fashion, and -fy. 1. A doing, making, or preparing. Obs.
A project for the fact and vending Of a new kind of fucus, paint for ladies. --B. Jonson.
2. An effect produced or achieved; anything done or that comes to pass; an act; an event; a circumstance.
What might instigate him to this devilish fact, I am not able to conjecture. --Evelyn.
He who most excels in fact of arms. --Milton.
3. Reality; actuality; truth; as, he, in fact, excelled all the rest; the fact is, he was beaten.
4. The assertion or statement of a thing done or existing; sometimes, even when false, improperly put, by a transfer of meaning, for the thing done, or supposed to be done; a thing supposed or asserted to be done; as, history abounds with false facts.
I do not grant the fact. --De Foe.
This reasoning is founded upon a fact which is not true. --Roger Long.
Note: TheTerm fact has in jurisprudence peculiar uses in contrast with low; as, attorney at low, and attorney in fact; issue in low, and issue in fact. There is also a grand distinction between low and fact with reference to the province of the judge and that of the jury, the latter generally determining the fact, the former the low. --Burrill Bouvier.
Accessary before, or after, the fact. See under Accessary.
Matter of fact, an actual occurrence; a verity; used adjectively: of or pertaining to facts; prosaic; unimaginative; as, a matter-of-fact narration.
"WordNet (r) 2.0" fact n 1: a piece of information about circumstances that exist or events that have occurred; "first you must collect all the facts of the case" 2: a statement or assertion of verified information about something that is the case or has happened; "he supported his argument with an impressive array of facts" 3: an event known to have happened or something known to have existed; "your fears have no basis in fact"; "how much of the story is fact and how much fiction is hard to tell" 4: a concept whose truth can be proved; "scientific hypotheses are not facts"
"The Free On-line Dictionary of Computing (27 SEP 03)" FACT
Fully Automated Compiling Technique
"The Free On-line Dictionary of Computing (27 SEP 03)" fact
<artificial intelligence, programming> The kind of clause used in logic programming which has no subgoals and so is always true (always succeeds). E.g.
wet(water). male(denis).
This is in contrast to a rule which only succeeds if all its subgoals do. Rules usually contain logic variables, facts rarely do, except for oddities like "equal(X,X).".
i think you've got a good idea, but in this particular case, it would be EXTRA difficult to pull off; Toutatis is tumbling along two axes, making its motion highly unpredicatable.
Getting it to move to a Lagrange point would be extremely difficult. we'd probably have to stop its rotation first, and since its angular movement and rotation seemed to be tied, it's going to be tough.
Toutatis is shaped almost like a bowling pin, maybe if we put rockets on each of its ends, and used computerized sensors to do controlled burns, we could get its rotation stabilized.
Once we had that, we could do some course corrections, and eventually be able to move it into a controlled orbit or Lagrange point.
I imagine the amount of fuel (energy) needed for all this would make the whole plan unfeasible though.
Lets change the law so Microsoft has to divulge their source-code for analysis to see how much they have "ripped off" CTSS.
I'm sure we can find a lot of patents and algorithms in there. for example; FORGET INTERNET CONNECTIVITY, Microsoft; all your networking code r belong to us now, see?
You'll see them change their stance on copyright and IP law pretty quickly, if you ask me.
It'b be interesting to watch all their lobbyist and FUD people run around looking for an escape hatch!
Either way, it's going to happen; Microsoft will be trumped by prior art. Foregone conclusion.
You gravitate towards what you're attracted to (hacking) and the more you run in those circles, the more there'll be people there to exploit you.
It's too bad hackers (should I be using the term "crackers", really?) don't have a highly-developed sense of ethics.
Like other scientists, they end up making tools that can be used to harm people, but maybe a combination of factors makes them even LESS ethically pre-occupied than most scientists.
If you can indeed call hacking a science... Maybe it's more of a craft. I don't know really.
When you're young and living in the basement of your parents, you can create network disruptions for fun, but when you get older and move out, you have bills to pay.
So you get a job, naturally, with your skillz, the people willing to hire you aren't exactly altruistic.
Slashdot Mirror
The here & now flows from the there & then.
That is why the rest of the world is concerned.
All that aside, of course it's a matter for the people of the U.S. to settle on their own.
Having other nations actually vote for your government would be as unjust as the U.S. unilateraly embarking on wars against the wishes of the United Nations. Er...
Yes, what you did in Afghanistan in the 80s was destabilize the region. And twenty years later, it became the REASON you had to go back; to try and fix what you had meddled with in the first place.
And yes, you SHOULD have done nothing, on that we agree. If you hadn't screwed up Afghanistan in the first place, there would have been no 9/11.
Yup, you should have done nothing. I couldn't agree more.
>Let's get something straight - we are "meddling" in the affairs of other countries, for the most part, by their request.
You're referring to the U.S. supplying weapons, fomenting revolutions and destabilizing governments in south america and Afghanistan, I presume?
I think we all missed that meeting.
>Tough. It's our vote, not yours. I'm getting really sick of these arrogant Europeans thinking their oppinion in our election even matters.
It would be correct to tell the rest of the world to piss off and mind their own business because the U.S. presidential elections are U.S. business if the U.S. stopped meddling in foreign governments.
Whatever the outcome of this election, it WILL have repercussions on the rest of the world.
THAT'S why the rest of the world feels they must state their opinion, obviously.
Isn't the whole issue of trying to buy the source-code completely moot?
If the code was released under the GPL voluntarily, even the authors of the code can't "take it back" as long as the code is being used under the spirit of the license.
Standard "divide and conquer" by Microsoft and SCO here, move along.
At least someone here knows what's going on.
Try it. No spyware.
Bingo.
I lived on it for a month while evaluating which distro I was going to go with.
I chose Gentoo, but I always have the latest Knoppix boot-cd with me because I frequently screw up my system.
That's what has amazed me since abandoning Windows last year; with Linux, you always seem to be able to go in and fix whatever is broken.
In the Windows world, often, there is NO other alternative but backing up the data and reformatting.
Knoppix embodies just how powerful open source is; it's a modular distro, able to boot from a CD with no need of a hard-disk.
Captain Scarlet worked for an organization whose base was one of these air-platforms:
cloudbase
Funny thing about that guy, Captain Scarlet;
During the end credits, you would always see him pinned under a pile of boulders, with a lit fuse on a bundle of dynamite just out of his arm's reach,
Or you'd see him underwater, bound by chains attached to weights pulling him to the bottom as great sharks loomed towards him,
Or tied up with ropes while a cobra coils, preparing to strike him,
Or pushed from a moving car,
Or someone trying to run him over with a tank.
My point is this guy... It just didn't seem like he was very well-liked.
so it won't make any difference to me how much fake support SCO try to drum up.
I encourage everyone to boycott it to protest the Microsoft tax on it.
If they want me to buy it, make it available WITHOUT Microsoft Windows and give me the dollar savings.
>Instead of revoking "personship" rights from corporations we treat them more fully as "persons". In particular that would include prison sentences for criminal violations, or even for contempt of court. I will leave it up to the reader to dream up suitable means of implementing said prison sentences on corporations.
Still not good enough.
As long as corporations enjoy all the same protections as individuals, the individual with the most amount of cash (the corporation) will ALWAYS win in any fight against individual persons.
Both being equal in the eyes of the law, it will always be a question of who has more resources.
So in a fight between you and Microsoft, for example, Microsoft will always have more lawyers, and will tie you in knots every time, and you will lose.
The law giving individual rights to corporations MUST BE CHANGED!
It's the worm in the apple of American society, and you can even trace almost every terrible problem the U.S. has back to it.
Come on, brave citizens, take back your rights, and REALLY lead the world, by example.
But I am running Linux now, and I am already more pleased with it than I ever was with Windows.
I ran Windows exclusively from 1989 to 2003.
I really believe that the reason for this incredible quality and stability is that the Linux operating system sprang up not as a product like Windows was, but rather as a desire to produce a good operating system.
It's two very opposed views in this case.
>The other advantage of Lithium Polymer batteries is energy can be captured from regenerative braking.
Just a note, you could also run small dynamos off the wheels when you brake that could power more electrolysis.
Come on AT&T, break that old chestnut about how PCs are for business and Macs are only for media creators!
The Mac would be an EXCELLENT choice.
It's easier for users and it's robust.
Of course it costs more.
On the other hand, I suppose if their I.T. department really has their act together, they could find a way to deploy an already-configured-for-their-precise-needs version of Linux too, only that would probably be harder to set up.
Also, it may be prohibitively expensive to go with Macs, because you essentially have to scrap your existing PCs, seeing as how you can't run Mac on PCs (yet)
"Webster's Revised Unabridged Dictionary (1913)"
Fact Fact, n. L. factum, fr. facere to make or do. Cf.
Feat, Affair, Benefit, Defect, Fashion, and -fy.
1. A doing, making, or preparing. Obs.
A project for the fact and vending Of a new kind of
fucus, paint for ladies. --B. Jonson.
2. An effect produced or achieved; anything done or that
comes to pass; an act; an event; a circumstance.
What might instigate him to this devilish fact, I am
not able to conjecture. --Evelyn.
He who most excels in fact of arms. --Milton.
3. Reality; actuality; truth; as, he, in fact, excelled all
the rest; the fact is, he was beaten.
4. The assertion or statement of a thing done or existing;
sometimes, even when false, improperly put, by a transfer
of meaning, for the thing done, or supposed to be done; a
thing supposed or asserted to be done; as, history abounds
with false facts.
I do not grant the fact. --De Foe.
This reasoning is founded upon a fact which is not
true. --Roger Long.
Note: TheTerm fact has in jurisprudence peculiar uses in
contrast with low; as, attorney at low, and attorney in
fact; issue in low, and issue in fact. There is also a
grand distinction between low and fact with reference
to the province of the judge and that of the jury, the
latter generally determining the fact, the former the
low. --Burrill Bouvier.
Accessary before, or after, the fact. See under
Accessary.
Matter of fact, an actual occurrence; a verity; used
adjectively: of or pertaining to facts; prosaic;
unimaginative; as, a matter-of-fact narration.
Syn: Act; deed; performance; event; incident; occurrence;
circumstance.
"WordNet (r) 2.0"
fact
n 1: a piece of information about circumstances that exist or
events that have occurred; "first you must collect all
the facts of the case"
2: a statement or assertion of verified information about
something that is the case or has happened; "he supported
his argument with an impressive array of facts"
3: an event known to have happened or something known to have
existed; "your fears have no basis in fact"; "how much of
the story is fact and how much fiction is hard to tell"
4: a concept whose truth can be proved; "scientific hypotheses
are not facts"
"The Free On-line Dictionary of Computing (27 SEP 03)"
FACT
Fully Automated Compiling Technique
"The Free On-line Dictionary of Computing (27 SEP 03)"
fact
<artificial intelligence, programming> The kind of clause
used in logic programming which has no subgoals and so is
always true (always succeeds). E.g.
wet(water).
male(denis).
This is in contrast to a rule which only succeeds if all its
subgoals do. Rules usually contain logic variables, facts
rarely do, except for oddities like "equal(X,X).".
(1996-10-20)
i think you've got a good idea, but in this particular case, it would be EXTRA difficult to pull off; Toutatis is tumbling along two axes, making its motion highly unpredicatable.
Getting it to move to a Lagrange point would be extremely difficult. we'd probably have to stop its rotation first, and since its angular movement and rotation seemed to be tied, it's going to be tough.
Toutatis is shaped almost like a bowling pin, maybe if we put rockets on each of its ends, and used computerized sensors to do controlled burns, we could get its rotation stabilized.
Once we had that, we could do some course corrections, and eventually be able to move it into a controlled orbit or Lagrange point.
I imagine the amount of fuel (energy) needed for all this would make the whole plan unfeasible though.
That's not the point.
It's a pre-emptive strike against Microsoft's IP and patenting shenanigans.
I'm sure we can find similarities.
What's Microsoft's reaction going to be?
"It's ridiculous to try and patent software"
Exactly.
Is it open-source?
The hardware needs to run code, and the machine will need more code to interface the Internet.
If it isn't open, we can just wait for the next guy to implement it open and flock there.
Honestly, I feel mesh networks will render communications monopolies irrelevant anyhow.
You have to remember that the art belongs to the artist and it's the artist's vision that he is trying to do justice to, not yours.
It's not that I don't feel for you; I think the original movies were sweet in a way BECAUSE they left a lot for our imaginations to fill in!
That's why the whole mythology could fit your hopes and dreams so closely.
Everyone's hopes and dreams.
we all filled in the blanks so nobly for the same reason we were drawn to the story in the first place.
Anyhow, I remember how I felt, and I still feel that way today, it lit the way for me, and that,s still valuable.
Lets change the law so Microsoft has to divulge their source-code for analysis to see how much they have "ripped off" CTSS.
I'm sure we can find a lot of patents and algorithms in there. for example; FORGET INTERNET CONNECTIVITY, Microsoft; all your networking code r belong to us now, see?
You'll see them change their stance on copyright and IP law pretty quickly, if you ask me.
It'b be interesting to watch all their lobbyist and FUD people run around looking for an escape hatch!
Either way, it's going to happen; Microsoft will be trumped by prior art. Foregone conclusion.
In a two-party system like the U.S. has, what is your strategy to draw voters and most importantly have them take you seriously?
I figure it's a lot like gravity, Paul.
You gravitate towards what you're attracted to (hacking) and the more you run in those circles, the more there'll be people there to exploit you.
It's too bad hackers (should I be using the term "crackers", really?) don't have a highly-developed sense of ethics.
Like other scientists, they end up making tools that can be used to harm people, but maybe a combination of factors makes them even LESS ethically pre-occupied than most scientists.
If you can indeed call hacking a science... Maybe it's more of a craft. I don't know really.
When you're young and living in the basement of your parents, you can create network disruptions for fun, but when you get older and move out, you have bills to pay.
So you get a job, naturally, with your skillz, the people willing to hire you aren't exactly altruistic.
Thanks, tip the veal and try the waitresses.