Hate to tell you this, but your understanding of 'volume licensing' from Microsoft is a little... wrong.
There are several standard types of volume licensing:
Open License - this is a 2 year license, giving you certain benefits beyond the software itself. The software license is perpetual, it never expires.
Select License - this is a 3 year license, giving you certain benefits beyond the software itself. The software license is perpetual, it never expires.
Open Value Subscription - this is a 3 year license, allowing you to pay monthly, annually or in one lump sum. You can either purchase the licenses outright, or rent them for the license period. Certain versions of this license allow you to remediate your licensing needs at the end of each year, rather than as you increase your licensed install base.
Open License and Select License are the two most popular licenses, and they are both perpetual, so yes the keys will continue to work under them.
I don't agree with the GP, but people need to stop immediately assuming any mention of Israel equates to Judaism. You can talk about Israel without ever intending to discuss Judaism. Yes, even when being critical about things.
Infact, the first widely used jailbreaking technique involved exploiting Safari on the iPhone to crash it and inject code - there was infact a website you could visit to jailbreak your iPhone simply by clicking on a link.
This is actually still a problem - why does Apple have a UK keyboard layout which is different to standard UK keyboard layouts? You have the option to choose 'UK Keyboard' specifically when speccing a new Apple system, but its different to the UK keyboard prevelent. Annoying.
I don't use any script blocking stuff (past the standard popup blocker) in Firefox or Safari and I'm getting the linked issues and worse. Slashdots broken something.
Interestingly enough, on my Windows 7 computer I have lost the ability to post to Slashdot on *any* browser - they all do the same thing, I hit 'Preview' and it sits there for a while 'Loading...' and then just reverts back to the initial comment box. Why would this happen on IE, Safari, Firefox and Opera? What common components related to AJAX form submission do these browsers have? Is this a Slashdot issue or is this a Windows 7 issue?
I hate to break it to you, but no ownership is a natural right beyond what you can protect yourself - all ownership that is protected by law is artificial, copyright included.
Your point is? I was simply proving j79zlr completely wrong when they suggested that there hadn't been any major aircraft incidents since 9/11. They happen every year.
Heh, that teaches me for copying and pasting:) Its worth nothing that my 'list' is purely notable western widebody incidents, and there was infact over 100 incidents between 2001 and today.
Covered under 'inspector' - all of Airbuses FBW systems, just like Boeings, are certified to fly by the FAA and EASA. By the way, all Boeings since the 777 was launched are Fly By Wire as well.
The Air Comet aircraft was over 2,000km away from where Air France 447 was supposed to be, and the pilots report has been discounted by everyone in the industry.
See, the problem is that my privacy is none of your business.
...
Your visitors have not entered into any relationship with the third party, and are not getting any service from them. So why are you letting them get milked?
You are quite correct, your privacy is none of his business, so why are you bitching at him for taking advantage of your lack of due diligence and responsibility for your own privacy?
Why should anything be 'up' with the parental control system? Should parents not have the choice as to whether to allow their kids to be exposed to bad language, or are you advocating removing that responsibility from the parents?
Part of the reason for restricting kids exposure to swear words is so that they learn their context - if other kids use it, but its not used in any other context, then the kid should correct ascern that the word is 'acceptable' in some contexts but not others.
When is someone going to figure this out? Suppose Media Company X has some recorded shows and live sports coverage they'd like to put online, and make a profit from it. They want to make it available globally, but advertisers are only interested in targeting specific regions.
The solution is to.... *snip*.
Your solution does not take into account that that Media company may not own the rights to distribute outside its own territory, especially when it comes to sporting events. Distribution rights are hot potatoes, and change hands for huge amounts of money.
And wikipedia isnt in a position of power? We have already seen evidence of the definition of 'true' being twisted to actually mean 'provable by citation', which in several cases has been highlighted as completely lacking.
Your example of there being other wiki sites is just as poor as their being alternatives to your ISP - I can guarantee that you will *always* get dialup wherever you are, but is that adequet? No. But then again, typically neither are alterantive wiki sites.
Ok, Microsoft spent $6billion developing Vista - what was their planned 'Return On Investment' period for that money? A decade? Less? Quite probably no more than 5 years.
Compare that to the timescale for the ITER - ~ $12billion over 30 years (2006 program initiation, 10 year build cycle, 20 year operation). And thats not counting cost and timescale overruns. And thats assuming there is likely to be an ROI on that investment...
Would Microsoft have spent $6billion investing in a product if they were unlikely to start to see even a start on ROI for 15 years? I doubt that - even aircraft manufacturers expect to have their costs recouped within a decade of program initiation, and they spend upwards of $10billion on a single product.
You see my point? Its exactly the same as the one I made in my parent post...
If Governments were not allowed to invest in these programs, they wouldn't get done. Hubble would still be a pipe dream, the Mars rovers would still be in the back of someones mind as they drove an RC car around a circuit. Sometimes investment has to be made in pure science, and unfortunately the risk is too great for corporations to take interest.
Name one other funding source that is willing to commit to billions of dollars over a very long period - charities and trusts certainlyt won't, and as I noted before corporations are highly unlikely to. So what are we left with?
On that note, where is the funding from Greenpeace et al for this sort of research?
People used to say the same about Hubble... Personally, I like the fact that Governments put money into pure-science research, because no one else is likely to.
Fusion, if ever successful, is likely to revolutionise our society, and the only way its ever going to be successful is if investment is made.
What for-profit company is likely to make a multi-billion dollar investment that, even discounting the possibility of failure, it is unlikely to see any chance of a return on for 40 years? The only industries I can think that make billion dollar investments are shipmakers and aircraft manufacturers, and their planned ROI period is much less than 40 years.
Slashdot Mirror
There are several standard types of volume licensing:
Open License and Select License are the two most popular licenses, and they are both perpetual, so yes the keys will continue to work under them.
I don't agree with the GP, but people need to stop immediately assuming any mention of Israel equates to Judaism. You can talk about Israel without ever intending to discuss Judaism. Yes, even when being critical about things.
That is not what you said however, you just modified your stance.
Infact, the first widely used jailbreaking technique involved exploiting Safari on the iPhone to crash it and inject code - there was infact a website you could visit to jailbreak your iPhone simply by clicking on a link.
Transferring copyrighted music on the internet is fair use, not piracy.
That, as a blanket statement, is as stupid and as false as anything the RIAA or equivilent associations have ever said.
This is actually still a problem - why does Apple have a UK keyboard layout which is different to standard UK keyboard layouts? You have the option to choose 'UK Keyboard' specifically when speccing a new Apple system, but its different to the UK keyboard prevelent. Annoying.
I don't use any script blocking stuff (past the standard popup blocker) in Firefox or Safari and I'm getting the linked issues and worse. Slashdots broken something.
Interestingly enough, on my Windows 7 computer I have lost the ability to post to Slashdot on *any* browser - they all do the same thing, I hit 'Preview' and it sits there for a while 'Loading...' and then just reverts back to the initial comment box. Why would this happen on IE, Safari, Firefox and Opera? What common components related to AJAX form submission do these browsers have? Is this a Slashdot issue or is this a Windows 7 issue?
So basically you are assuming its Linux based? Everything I have read suggests it is not.
I hate to break it to you, but no ownership is a natural right beyond what you can protect yourself - all ownership that is protected by law is artificial, copyright included.
Your point is? I was simply proving j79zlr completely wrong when they suggested that there hadn't been any major aircraft incidents since 9/11. They happen every year.
Heh, that teaches me for copying and pasting :) Its worth nothing that my 'list' is purely notable western widebody incidents, and there was infact over 100 incidents between 2001 and today.
Uhm, nope - you forget...
...and I could go on.
2009
- Fedex Flight 80, McDD MD-11
2008
- British Airways Flight 38, Boeing 777
- Kalitta Air, Boeing 747F
- Sudan Airways Flight Flight 109, Airbus A310
- Fedex Flight 80, McDD MD-11
Covered under 'inspector' - all of Airbuses FBW systems, just like Boeings, are certified to fly by the FAA and EASA. By the way, all Boeings since the 777 was launched are Fly By Wire as well.
The Air Comet aircraft was over 2,000km away from where Air France 447 was supposed to be, and the pilots report has been discounted by everyone in the industry.
If you walk around naked, you can't complain when people look at you.
See, the problem is that my privacy is none of your business.
...
Your visitors have not entered into any relationship with the third party, and are not getting any service from them. So why are you letting them get milked?
You are quite correct, your privacy is none of his business, so why are you bitching at him for taking advantage of your lack of due diligence and responsibility for your own privacy?
Your privacy is not his responsibility.
What rights are those? You are using a privately owned store...
Why should anything be 'up' with the parental control system? Should parents not have the choice as to whether to allow their kids to be exposed to bad language, or are you advocating removing that responsibility from the parents?
Part of the reason for restricting kids exposure to swear words is so that they learn their context - if other kids use it, but its not used in any other context, then the kid should correct ascern that the word is 'acceptable' in some contexts but not others.
There should be no compulsion to contribute, as the freedom to choose to contribute or not *must* be one of the fundamental freedoms in Open Source.
Think of their usage as advertising...
When is someone going to figure this out? Suppose Media Company X has some recorded shows and live sports coverage they'd like to put online, and make a profit from it. They want to make it available globally, but advertisers are only interested in targeting specific regions.
The solution is to .... *snip*.
Your solution does not take into account that that Media company may not own the rights to distribute outside its own territory, especially when it comes to sporting events. Distribution rights are hot potatoes, and change hands for huge amounts of money.
And wikipedia isnt in a position of power? We have already seen evidence of the definition of 'true' being twisted to actually mean 'provable by citation', which in several cases has been highlighted as completely lacking.
Your example of there being other wiki sites is just as poor as their being alternatives to your ISP - I can guarantee that you will *always* get dialup wherever you are, but is that adequet? No. But then again, typically neither are alterantive wiki sites.
Ok, Microsoft spent $6billion developing Vista - what was their planned 'Return On Investment' period for that money? A decade? Less? Quite probably no more than 5 years.
Compare that to the timescale for the ITER - ~ $12billion over 30 years (2006 program initiation, 10 year build cycle, 20 year operation). And thats not counting cost and timescale overruns. And thats assuming there is likely to be an ROI on that investment...
Would Microsoft have spent $6billion investing in a product if they were unlikely to start to see even a start on ROI for 15 years? I doubt that - even aircraft manufacturers expect to have their costs recouped within a decade of program initiation, and they spend upwards of $10billion on a single product.
You see my point? Its exactly the same as the one I made in my parent post...
If Governments were not allowed to invest in these programs, they wouldn't get done. Hubble would still be a pipe dream, the Mars rovers would still be in the back of someones mind as they drove an RC car around a circuit. Sometimes investment has to be made in pure science, and unfortunately the risk is too great for corporations to take interest.
Name one other funding source that is willing to commit to billions of dollars over a very long period - charities and trusts certainlyt won't, and as I noted before corporations are highly unlikely to. So what are we left with?
On that note, where is the funding from Greenpeace et al for this sort of research?
You misunderstood the summary then - its not a global announcement, its a global first. As in Microsoft hasn't done this before anywhere.
People used to say the same about Hubble... Personally, I like the fact that Governments put money into pure-science research, because no one else is likely to.
Fusion, if ever successful, is likely to revolutionise our society, and the only way its ever going to be successful is if investment is made.
What for-profit company is likely to make a multi-billion dollar investment that, even discounting the possibility of failure, it is unlikely to see any chance of a return on for 40 years? The only industries I can think that make billion dollar investments are shipmakers and aircraft manufacturers, and their planned ROI period is much less than 40 years.