I'm not a US citizen but politics is the same everywhere so:
Mr. candidate: name three specific measures you will take to defeat issues you have come to understand are most important to us voters and for which you will forgo candidateship at the end of your governing period. if not implemented.
The politician should select the issues (after all supposedly he's been listening to public opinion and trying to understand what his country needs).
I think it's high time we've asked for some accountability on the part of our leaders...
P.S. On the other hand, Bush can't run for election again if he's elected twice, right?
Already development is taking place in the 2.6 branch rather than a 2.7 one, as used to be the case. It is now up to the distros - as far as I've understood - to provide a stable kernel and update it with selected patches.
Couldn't a distro create and maintain a stable ABI for the kernel line it distributes? I'm assuming if one of the major distros does it, others will follow suit and will create a de-facto standard if lots of drivers spring up for it (perhaps with backing from major hardware vendors).
Would such a move significantly limit the applicability of patches with future work from the developers, to the ABI-stable version? My simplistic thinking is that the distro would leave out anything that breaks the ABI spanning a reasonable time-frame (e.g. 2 years). Only when something really cool happens, it would introduce a new "stable" ABI including any blocked functionality. This would suck if often cool new stuff can only be added by breaking the ABI and thus the distro gets left behind.
Could someone with the necessary technical knowledge enlighten us regarding the feasibility of such a thing? Is the ABI so constantly morphing?
...but I don't think even 5 or 10 guys with knives would be able to hijack a plane in the US, post September 11th.
You know what, tou couldn't be more right! The 9/11 hijackers simply surprised everyone, because no precedent existed to make people react immediately. Things are different now.
Guess what: given the 9/11, if some guys in a plane I'm in go for the cockpit holding knives, that's it for me! I'll run to grab them no matter what. And even if I'm full of &*$$%^ and don't have the courage to do so, I bet at least one person will, which will cause others to join in. It doesn't matter if the terrorists claim they have bombs on the plane, because most people will think they're as good as dead anyway! I bet you even arabs who happen to be on the flight and who are normal non-fundamentalist loonies will help!
Increasing airport security regarding dangerous objects (guns, bombs) on the plane is important. Such laws however... I don't see them helping in making flights secure. They have other goals.
I would like to see an experiment (with cooperation from Wiki) where:
The number of times the incorrect article was viewed is logged.
The area (based on IP?) from which potential corrections came from.
Chances are: if nobody read it, it can't be fixed. The error never "existed". If it was, how many people were "fooled" before it was fixed? My guess is that the corrector would be one of the people who received the incorrect information would be the same ones to fix it once they found out!
I found both parent comments interesting and even more so because of a very important factor NOT present in the game: PHYSICAL INTERACTION.
You see, while it may be true that nerd-types may often look "uncool" and while it may also be true that "flirting" can help achieve some goals without effort, in this game these factors are modified. As always, in the net, it's not what you look like it's what you write like.
I wonder, will players of the game go as far as actually meet in the real world and discuss game strategy......and other stuff?
Many Java developers are frustrated by the not-so-open process to improve/correct/augment the Java core libraries. Unless you work for Sun or belong to a JSR expert group, there is very little you can do to influence the future of the Java platform.
What about MS? I think that they also wanted to "embrace and extend" Java as well at some point.
My point is, that sometimes I feel like people think free software should always get its way as a matter of principle. The truth is, that you are free to write an alternative classpath. and distribute it with your own VM as it is. Quit moaning and join in with the guys at GNU Classpath. Sun doesn't mind. It's focusing on its own. That's what MS did.
You hve a point. But I still wouldn't take them off the hook so fast. This seems to indicate that NetGear should require a "no backdoors inside" guarantee on such contracts.
I think that it might actually be something Java-based. The article says:
...IBM's new software is designed to be distributed and accessed through a Web server...
...unlike pure Web applications, the new software is designed to be used offline, so mobile users on laptops or handheld devices can connect, quickly access applications and disconnect to do work offline...
The web interface will be limited to things like initial setup (like java web start), browsing on-line help, group collaboration etc.
Fortunately, most (hopefully) people dont drink and drive, but I'm not sure it doesn't appeal to them. What if some DUIer runs into you (or over your children) while you are legitimately driving your car?
Still, even so, I am ambivalent on the issue of whether so much control is a good thing.
It's not DoS! SCO is just /.'ed
on
SCO Offline
·
· Score: 1
I mean, as soon as I saw the entry, I eagerly visited their site to see if it's reachable. How many/.ers are doing the same?
How about more-or-less everything regarding network management? Ok, so most SNMP related stuff uses polling as you said, but if I'm not mistaken, I think you can cofigure routers/switches to report status/statistics periodically to the NMS and... compile reports!
...and the police, I have to add, who will hopefully take care of that! Besides, they will be helped by the fact that they can easily tell the outlaws apart: they have guns!
What is needed here is both strict safety regulation and a ban or heavy tariff on goods from countries that do not enforce a basic level of similar reguations. This will force IBM and others to clean up their act and prevent them from just transfering the plants overseas.
...which one can probably not expect from a nation which refuses to agree to the Kyoto protocol.
As many people are pointing out, immunity is a force-feedback system. As viruses spread, their hosts evolve to become better at fighting them. Which in turn leads to "better" viruses. Which in turn...
Of course, interpreting "legalese" usually favors the 'bullying' party. I mean, how can one argue that any device is designed specifically for copyright violation, if it can do anything else which is useful?
If one were to create a CD reader which will read even damaged CDs, it would be particularly useful for 'disaster recovery' of data on a damaged CD-ROM. If this CD reader can retrieve the data from this copy protected CD, is it then designed specifically to circumvent copy protection?
I was too young to follow the Microsoft vs Apple case when Windows came out but I am wondering: How come Apple can now copyright and defend a "Look and feel" but failed to do so against MS?
Kind of reminds me of the situation in Italy, where their prime-minister is a business man owning the most popular private Italian media networks.
He got flamed a lot for this by the European press, during the last Italian elections.
Now that he won and is the prime-minister of Italy, he is also in control of the goverment television networks (RAI).
Can you imagine the CEO of NAWCAT being the president of the USA?
Slashdot Mirror
I'm not a US citizen but politics is the same everywhere so:
The politician should select the issues (after all supposedly he's been listening to public opinion and trying to understand what his country needs).
I think it's high time we've asked for some accountability on the part of our leaders...
P.S. On the other hand, Bush can't run for election again if he's elected twice, right?
List of compliant distros via Coral cache: HERE.
Already development is taking place in the 2.6 branch rather than a 2.7 one, as used to be the case. It is now up to the distros - as far as I've understood - to provide a stable kernel and update it with selected patches.
Couldn't a distro create and maintain a stable ABI for the kernel line it distributes? I'm assuming if one of the major distros does it, others will follow suit and will create a de-facto standard if lots of drivers spring up for it (perhaps with backing from major hardware vendors).
Would such a move significantly limit the applicability of patches with future work from the developers, to the ABI-stable version? My simplistic thinking is that the distro would leave out anything that breaks the ABI spanning a reasonable time-frame (e.g. 2 years). Only when something really cool happens, it would introduce a new "stable" ABI including any blocked functionality. This would suck if often cool new stuff can only be added by breaking the ABI and thus the distro gets left behind.
Could someone with the necessary technical knowledge enlighten us regarding the feasibility of such a thing? Is the ABI so constantly morphing?
Perhaps /. scripts should be modified to automatically prepend a Coral link to user provided links.
This way, assuming someone posts a story with:
It would come up as:
You know what, tou couldn't be more right! The 9/11 hijackers simply surprised everyone, because no precedent existed to make people react immediately. Things are different now.
Guess what: given the 9/11, if some guys in a plane I'm in go for the cockpit holding knives, that's it for me! I'll run to grab them no matter what. And even if I'm full of &*$$%^ and don't have the courage to do so, I bet at least one person will, which will cause others to join in. It doesn't matter if the terrorists claim they have bombs on the plane, because most people will think they're as good as dead anyway! I bet you even arabs who happen to be on the flight and who are normal non-fundamentalist loonies will help!
Increasing airport security regarding dangerous objects (guns, bombs) on the plane is important. Such laws however... I don't see them helping in making flights secure. They have other goals.
I would like to see an experiment (with cooperation from Wiki) where:
Chances are: if nobody read it, it can't be fixed. The error never "existed". If it was, how many people were "fooled" before it was fixed? My guess is that the corrector would be one of the people who received the incorrect information would be the same ones to fix it once they found out!
Are you crazy? No way! First:
Then:
I found both parent comments interesting and even more so because of a very important factor NOT present in the game: PHYSICAL INTERACTION.
You see, while it may be true that nerd-types may often look "uncool" and while it may also be true that "flirting" can help achieve some goals without effort, in this game these factors are modified. As always, in the net, it's not what you look like it's what you write like.
I wonder, will players of the game go as far as actually meet in the real world and discuss game strategy......and other stuff?
What about MS? I think that they also wanted to "embrace and extend" Java as well at some point.
My point is, that sometimes I feel like people think free software should always get its way as a matter of principle. The truth is, that you are free to write an alternative classpath. and distribute it with your own VM as it is. Quit moaning and join in with the guys at GNU Classpath. Sun doesn't mind. It's focusing on its own. That's what MS did.
You hve a point. But I still wouldn't take them off the hook so fast. This seems to indicate that NetGear should require a "no backdoors inside" guarantee on such contracts.
They'll probably (and in my opinion must) sue. Otherwise this simply makes NetGear look bad three-fold:
I think that it might actually be something Java-based. The article says:
The web interface will be limited to things like initial setup (like java web start), browsing on-line help, group collaboration etc.
The Smart-Its Project has been doing something similar since around 2000.
http://www.smart-its.org/Fortunately, most (hopefully) people dont drink and drive, but I'm not sure it doesn't appeal to them. What if some DUIer runs into you (or over your children) while you are legitimately driving your car? Still, even so, I am ambivalent on the issue of whether so much control is a good thing.
I mean, as soon as I saw the entry, I eagerly visited their site to see if it's reachable. How many /.ers are doing the same?
How about more-or-less everything regarding network management? Ok, so most SNMP related stuff uses polling as you said, but if I'm not mistaken, I think you can cofigure routers/switches to report status/statistics periodically to the NMS and... compile reports!
...and the police, I have to add, who will hopefully take care of that! Besides, they will be helped by the fact that they can easily tell the outlaws apart: they have guns!
I really think we should not think sympathetically about this. Consider this metaphor:
Unless you are an AT&T subscriber, you can't call people with AT&T phones.
How is that essentially different? Yet, people would not tolerate the above. Why should they with IM?
I couldn't agree with you more though. Sigh...
As many people are pointing out, immunity is a force-feedback system. As viruses spread, their hosts evolve to become better at fighting them. Which in turn leads to "better" viruses. Which in turn...
Actually, you will probably have a "deal" with Microsoft which will happily install .NET along with the next version of Windows on the PC. ;-P
Of course, interpreting "legalese" usually favors the 'bullying' party. I mean, how can one argue that any device is designed specifically for copyright violation, if it can do anything else which is useful?
If one were to create a CD reader which will read even damaged CDs, it would be particularly useful for 'disaster recovery' of data on a damaged CD-ROM. If this CD reader can retrieve the data from this copy protected CD, is it then designed specifically to circumvent copy protection?
I was too young to follow the Microsoft vs Apple case when Windows came out but I am wondering: How come Apple can now copyright and defend a "Look and feel" but failed to do so against MS?
Try guns for starters! What an irony: one has the right to own a gun but not video encoding / decoding technology!
Think about it... which of these can be used for something illegal?
Kind of reminds me of the situation in Italy, where their prime-minister is a business man owning the most popular private Italian media networks. He got flamed a lot for this by the European press, during the last Italian elections. Now that he won and is the prime-minister of Italy, he is also in control of the goverment television networks (RAI). Can you imagine the CEO of NAWCAT being the president of the USA?