This is suspicious to me - if the opposistion doesn't know exactly what was done, they can't argue the legality of the tap, which may strongly weaken the defense, and certainly makes it harder to appeal. Of course, they may be able to appeal on the grounds that they didn't get the info alone...
IE kicks the crap out of Nutscrape. Also, if Netscape (AOL now by the way... evil) had its way, you'd be paying $30 for your browser. MS made a better product, and gave it to you for free.
This is whats classically known as a loss-leader - you give something away for free (or cheap) in order to put your competition out of buissness, eating the losses because you have more cash on hand. Once your opposistion is gone, you up the price. Yes, I know IE is "free". However, you pay for it when you buy windows. Same with all these other "free" apps - they aren't free! It's part of the OS cost.
The point is not that the OS ships with these apps - the point is that MS makes them integral parts of the OS. For example, with win2k, you can't remove outlook express. Sure, I can choose not to use it, but it's always there, and from time to time it pops up and tries to be my mail client again. I could probably stop this behavior, but it's incredibly non-trivial, and wouldn't be if MS wasn't leveraging it's OS monopoly into applications. Same with IE, of course. Zip support, now that doesn't bother me so much. Seems to me that since zip compressions is so widespread, having your file manager know how to decompress it is reasonable. But media player part of the OS? And don't forget the license agreements that come with the new versions of Media Player, and that you agree to implicitly when you agree to the Windows license...
Simple fact is this - theres no long any room for debate. MS IS a monopoly. They use thier monopoly power to illegaly manipulate the market. They've been found guilty of this by one of the most pro-big-buisness administrations EVER, even if the Bush administration is backing down, cause it's even MORE pro-big-buisness. Don't forget, if MS was forced to not bundle apps, OEMs would bundle them - but thats the job of the OEMs! It allows for diversity and innovation. So your grandma would still get a computer that can play MP3s. Except that it would come an OEM version of WinAmp, rather than MS Media Player.
She should have done some better research, then - temple prostitues have a long and honorable religion, from Ancient Greece, to Rome, to India. And thats just what I know about off the top of my head.
Well, it's less likely because of the durability of our storage medium vrs the durability of documents from 2000 years ago, but lets say WW3 starts in the next couple weeks - 600 years from now, who's to say that archeologists won't uncover the Star Wars DVD boxed set from it's shrine in some geekoids house, and compare that with the fragments of data from the census, and decide that "Star Wars" is the story of Luke Skywalker, the prophet of the Jedi faith? And then huge debates erupt in the community over whether or not Luke really existed, or if he was purely alegorical, what kind of morons were we to believe in it, etc, etc....
At root, archeology and anthropology are deduction and guesswork - nothing more. Whats more, it's more or less impossible to conclusively prove or disprove a theory. There is nothing like a documented, provable record trail to prove that Jesus ever walked the earth, performing miracles. I understand that you believe it as an article of faith, but don't present it as scientific evidence.
I suppose you could call me agnostic - I don't believe in a God (any god), but I reserve the right to change that belief if circumstances require it. However, there's a large difference between belief and faith. I don't believe in the Christian God, but even if He did exist, I wouldn't worship him, because he's a twit.
This is an important point - the US military/industrial complex learned it's lesson in Vietnam. There will NEVER be the kind of wartime media coverage there was then. Look at the gulf war. All of the US screw ups, deaths to friendly fire, etc, etc, didn't make the news until well AFTER the fact. Thats because the military STRICTLY controls media access now. This will be the same. Hell, we could have dropped missles on an orphanage, and it's really unlikely that we'll ever know - the Taliban might say so, but you're never going to see it on the 6:00 news. Wars (not terrorism) need popular support to be truly successful (Vietnam, again), and the military will make damn sure that nothing threatens that support.
I keep seeing all kinds of statements about how bin Laden is this, he does that, he knows this. Can anyone actually SOURCE any of this info? I haven't heard anything beyond generalities and obvious hyperbole on TV.
On a side note, is anyone bothered by the fact that we've gone ahead with military force without any conclusive proof that bin Laden was even the one behind it? Does anyone question our motives in this attack?/.'ers seem to be very quick to see the hand of the menacing hand of the government in legislation, does anyone really believe that we are getting the whole story here? I'm not a conspiracy theorist, but I swear, the more I learn the more I think that maybe I should be.
Thats blatantly false - Microsoft products, as a whole, are not innately superior - they're superior because of the power MS is able to bring behind them. Proprietary APIs are a good example - noone can make a mass-appeal alternative to Office because MS likes to play games with the file formats and uses hidden API hooks into the OS. If other vendors were able to see into those hidden areas, they could easily make a product that matched Office. If vendors were able to remove and replace MS applications that ship with the OS, then Dell and HP and whatnot would be open to distribution agreements with the creators of this hypothetical suite.
This would be a perfect opportunity for the average consumer to realize that Microsoft isn't the only source for computing. Which of course is exactly what MS DOESN'T want, and what they use all the monopoly power to stop from happening.
Let me make this clear: No, MS thugs aren't beating down my doors, making me use windows. But, with thier monopoly posistion, they are able to use market forces as an alternative to competing themselves - so rather than making a superior product, they simply make an okay product that is the most visible and easily obtained. Thats a valid marketing strategy, but it wouldn't work if they couldn't leverage thier OS monopoly to power it.
I remember trying to help out a woman who could never remember when to double-click and when to single-click - god help me, I don't think she even knew there WAS a right mouse button. AOL user, natch:P
Win2k currently has something like this - by right-clicking, you can get a drop down menu with all the programs you've used to open a certain file extension - so I can right-click on a jpg, and choose either paint shop pro, microsoft image viewe, IE, netscape, etc.
ResEdit isn't third party, you can download it for free from Apple.
That said, perhaps he was talking about OS X... I agree it's a horrid pain to try to do it on Classic Mac
The point your missing is that MP3 is a de facto (market) standard - one thats come about because of market forces. The W3C creates agreed standards - the "offical" standards that the internet, in theory, runs on. If you can make your product widespread enough, you can become a de facto standard, and make money, without endorsemnt by the W3C. However, if you have closed, proprietary, agreed standards, you've just raised the entry bar - and one of the strengths of the web, that has allowed de facto standards to spread, has been the very low entry bar.
A few years afo (maybe 10) I read an article about the potential of "space billboards" - satellites in low earth orbit with REALLY bright light banks to spell out commercial logos - didn't catch on, for obvious reasons, but I can see it trying to make a comeback...
You really need to read more carefully. This is about ZONING, not legal jurisdiction. They aren't waying the city of Tampa doesn't have authority. They're saying that a zoning law doesn't apply. It's not really news....
Re:Functional languages and parentheses
on
Apocalypse 3
·
· Score: 1
I confess that I don't understand this prejudice people seem that have against parentheses. I use them constantly, often whether I need them or not, to clarify expression order. Maybe it's a habit I got into in high school math, when I could never remember if you added first or multiplied first.... but f(0) + f(1) is way more readable to me than f 0 + f 1. I've read a bit about Haskell, and it looks like a really nice language, but why this hatred against parentheses?
Perl makes it really easy to write hard to read code, and many of the people who love perl enjoy doing that - it's also that many fewer keystrokes. You CAN write clear, concise, well documented code in perl. It's not any harder than in C. As for all the $'s (I assume you know that the $ only goes in front of scalars, not arrays or hashes), I found that I like having a single, non-alpha character telling me what type of variable somethign is that I now use the technique in other languages - $one lets me know right away that it's a string. And so on.
It wasn't the hull plating, it was the polarization of the hull plating. They used polatization (by electromagnetic fields) to help repel particle weapons, and that's easy to go offline
Then why didn't they SAY "hull polarization offline"? It's not the hull plating. It's the polarization. Steel plates don't go offline:P
Assuming that they had to reverse-engineer alot of components from what the Vulcans gave them, then assimilate that technology into what they already had, I think 10 years would be a pretty decent interval. Theres alot of issues with building a starship beyond having a warp engine - and an engine that just made warp 1 couldn't have been all that usefull.
So, despite the fact that a military ship is full of immature whiners, and the interesting xenophysiology demonstration of how Vulcan nipples react to cold, this point is internally consistent. I still don't like the hull plating going off line, however:P
I'm unaware of how any of these things destroy his credibility - note that the national list is opt-in, and participation in it is totally voluntary on the part of the consumer.
Privacy advocates don't want to hide thier personal info from everyone (well, some of them...), they want to be able to make informed decisions about what personal info they share, and who they share it with. The ability to make this decisions is very lacking in the US today.
Making clean hydrogen is much cheaper and cleaner than refining gasoline - retrofit offshore oil platforms with solar panels and wind turbines, and you'd probably have great hydrogen-producers - could even use wave power for some of your electricity.
Oh, and tow all the oil platforms down near the equator, since they seem to mainly be in the North Sea where theres not all that much sun:P
The main problem, as others have said, is storage at the microlevel - on the car, or plane, or whatnot.
Slashdot Mirror
This is suspicious to me - if the opposistion doesn't know exactly what was done, they can't argue the legality of the tap, which may strongly weaken the defense, and certainly makes it harder to appeal. Of course, they may be able to appeal on the grounds that they didn't get the info alone...
It'd be a pain in the ass to destroy a CD-ROM "at a moment's notice"
Or "Hacking is not a crime"
IE kicks the crap out of Nutscrape. Also, if Netscape (AOL now by the way ... evil) had its way, you'd be paying $30 for your browser. MS made a better product, and gave it to you for free.
This is whats classically known as a loss-leader - you give something away for free (or cheap) in order to put your competition out of buissness, eating the losses because you have more cash on hand. Once your opposistion is gone, you up the price. Yes, I know IE is "free". However, you pay for it when you buy windows. Same with all these other "free" apps - they aren't free! It's part of the OS cost.
The point is not that the OS ships with these apps - the point is that MS makes them integral parts of the OS. For example, with win2k, you can't remove outlook express. Sure, I can choose not to use it, but it's always there, and from time to time it pops up and tries to be my mail client again. I could probably stop this behavior, but it's incredibly non-trivial, and wouldn't be if MS wasn't leveraging it's OS monopoly into applications. Same with IE, of course. Zip support, now that doesn't bother me so much. Seems to me that since zip compressions is so widespread, having your file manager know how to decompress it is reasonable. But media player part of the OS? And don't forget the license agreements that come with the new versions of Media Player, and that you agree to implicitly when you agree to the Windows license...
Simple fact is this - theres no long any room for debate. MS IS a monopoly. They use thier monopoly power to illegaly manipulate the market. They've been found guilty of this by one of the most pro-big-buisness administrations EVER, even if the Bush administration is backing down, cause it's even MORE pro-big-buisness. Don't forget, if MS was forced to not bundle apps, OEMs would bundle them - but thats the job of the OEMs! It allows for diversity and innovation. So your grandma would still get a computer that can play MP3s. Except that it would come an OEM version of WinAmp, rather than MS Media Player.
She should have done some better research, then - temple prostitues have a long and honorable religion, from Ancient Greece, to Rome, to India. And thats just what I know about off the top of my head.
Well, it's less likely because of the durability of our storage medium vrs the durability of documents from 2000 years ago, but lets say WW3 starts in the next couple weeks - 600 years from now, who's to say that archeologists won't uncover the Star Wars DVD boxed set from it's shrine in some geekoids house, and compare that with the fragments of data from the census, and decide that "Star Wars" is the story of Luke Skywalker, the prophet of the Jedi faith? And then huge debates erupt in the community over whether or not Luke really existed, or if he was purely alegorical, what kind of morons were we to believe in it, etc, etc....
At root, archeology and anthropology are deduction and guesswork - nothing more. Whats more, it's more or less impossible to conclusively prove or disprove a theory. There is nothing like a documented, provable record trail to prove that Jesus ever walked the earth, performing miracles. I understand that you believe it as an article of faith, but don't present it as scientific evidence.
I suppose you could call me agnostic - I don't believe in a God (any god), but I reserve the right to change that belief if circumstances require it. However, there's a large difference between belief and faith. I don't believe in the Christian God, but even if He did exist, I wouldn't worship him, because he's a twit.
A ministry of Homeland Defense
Does anyone but me find this departments name to be REALLY frightning?
This is an important point - the US military/industrial complex learned it's lesson in Vietnam. There will NEVER be the kind of wartime media coverage there was then. Look at the gulf war. All of the US screw ups, deaths to friendly fire, etc, etc, didn't make the news until well AFTER the fact. Thats because the military STRICTLY controls media access now. This will be the same. Hell, we could have dropped missles on an orphanage, and it's really unlikely that we'll ever know - the Taliban might say so, but you're never going to see it on the 6:00 news. Wars (not terrorism) need popular support to be truly successful (Vietnam, again), and the military will make damn sure that nothing threatens that support.
I keep seeing all kinds of statements about how bin Laden is this, he does that, he knows this. Can anyone actually SOURCE any of this info? I haven't heard anything beyond generalities and obvious hyperbole on TV.
/.'ers seem to be very quick to see the hand of the menacing hand of the government in legislation, does anyone really believe that we are getting the whole story here? I'm not a conspiracy theorist, but I swear, the more I learn the more I think that maybe I should be.
On a side note, is anyone bothered by the fact that we've gone ahead with military force without any conclusive proof that bin Laden was even the one behind it? Does anyone question our motives in this attack?
Thats blatantly false - Microsoft products, as a whole, are not innately superior - they're superior because of the power MS is able to bring behind them. Proprietary APIs are a good example - noone can make a mass-appeal alternative to Office because MS likes to play games with the file formats and uses hidden API hooks into the OS. If other vendors were able to see into those hidden areas, they could easily make a product that matched Office. If vendors were able to remove and replace MS applications that ship with the OS, then Dell and HP and whatnot would be open to distribution agreements with the creators of this hypothetical suite.
This would be a perfect opportunity for the average consumer to realize that Microsoft isn't the only source for computing. Which of course is exactly what MS DOESN'T want, and what they use all the monopoly power to stop from happening.
Let me make this clear: No, MS thugs aren't beating down my doors, making me use windows. But, with thier monopoly posistion, they are able to use market forces as an alternative to competing themselves - so rather than making a superior product, they simply make an okay product that is the most visible and easily obtained. Thats a valid marketing strategy, but it wouldn't work if they couldn't leverage thier OS monopoly to power it.
I remember trying to help out a woman who could never remember when to double-click and when to single-click - god help me, I don't think she even knew there WAS a right mouse button. AOL user, natch :P
Win2k currently has something like this - by right-clicking, you can get a drop down menu with all the programs you've used to open a certain file extension - so I can right-click on a jpg, and choose either paint shop pro, microsoft image viewe, IE, netscape, etc.
ResEdit isn't third party, you can download it for free from Apple. That said, perhaps he was talking about OS X... I agree it's a horrid pain to try to do it on Classic Mac
The point your missing is that MP3 is a de facto (market) standard - one thats come about because of market forces. The W3C creates agreed standards - the "offical" standards that the internet, in theory, runs on. If you can make your product widespread enough, you can become a de facto standard, and make money, without endorsemnt by the W3C. However, if you have closed, proprietary, agreed standards, you've just raised the entry bar - and one of the strengths of the web, that has allowed de facto standards to spread, has been the very low entry bar.
A few years afo (maybe 10) I read an article about the potential of "space billboards" - satellites in low earth orbit with REALLY bright light banks to spell out commercial logos - didn't catch on, for obvious reasons, but I can see it trying to make a comeback...
You really need to read more carefully. This is about ZONING, not legal jurisdiction. They aren't waying the city of Tampa doesn't have authority. They're saying that a zoning law doesn't apply. It's not really news....
I confess that I don't understand this prejudice people seem that have against parentheses. I use them constantly, often whether I need them or not, to clarify expression order. Maybe it's a habit I got into in high school math, when I could never remember if you added first or multiplied first.... but f(0) + f(1) is way more readable to me than f 0 + f 1. I've read a bit about Haskell, and it looks like a really nice language, but why this hatred against parentheses?
Perl makes it really easy to write hard to read code, and many of the people who love perl enjoy doing that - it's also that many fewer keystrokes. You CAN write clear, concise, well documented code in perl. It's not any harder than in C. As for all the $'s (I assume you know that the $ only goes in front of scalars, not arrays or hashes), I found that I like having a single, non-alpha character telling me what type of variable somethign is that I now use the technique in other languages - $one lets me know right away that it's a string. And so on.
It wasn't the hull plating, it was the polarization of the hull plating. They used polatization (by electromagnetic fields) to help repel particle weapons, and that's easy to go offline Then why didn't they SAY "hull polarization offline"? It's not the hull plating. It's the polarization. Steel plates don't go offline :P
Assuming that they had to reverse-engineer alot of components from what the Vulcans gave them, then assimilate that technology into what they already had, I think 10 years would be a pretty decent interval. Theres alot of issues with building a starship beyond having a warp engine - and an engine that just made warp 1 couldn't have been all that usefull.
So, despite the fact that a military ship is full of immature whiners, and the interesting xenophysiology demonstration of how Vulcan nipples react to cold, this point is internally consistent. I still don't like the hull plating going off line, however :P
I'm unaware of how any of these things destroy his credibility - note that the national list is opt-in, and participation in it is totally voluntary on the part of the consumer.
Privacy advocates don't want to hide thier personal info from everyone (well, some of them...), they want to be able to make informed decisions about what personal info they share, and who they share it with. The ability to make this decisions is very lacking in the US today.
violated its sturctural integrity.
gee, can't you just say "poked a hole in it" like the rest of us?
Making clean hydrogen is much cheaper and cleaner than refining gasoline - retrofit offshore oil platforms with solar panels and wind turbines, and you'd probably have great hydrogen-producers - could even use wave power for some of your electricity. Oh, and tow all the oil platforms down near the equator, since they seem to mainly be in the North Sea where theres not all that much sun :P
The main problem, as others have said, is storage at the microlevel - on the car, or plane, or whatnot.