Wow, you have illuminated the main point the Republicans have been trying to make for years. They have managed to instill such cynicism in the American people on purpose so people will be so jaded as to say such stupid and untrue things as "well, the Republicans aren't any worse then the other side."
But it's not true. The fact that you repeat such inane and untrue statements as in your post tells me that you've only followed sound bites for the last 4 years (maybe 20 years?).
How ignorant can you be when this is the FIRST time people were denied access to a IATC Meeting because of which presidential candidate they donated money to?
Heck, you're the one assuming he's not Caucasian just because he's of Indian descent.
Wrong. I'm assuming it also. Is that, ok? Why would i not assume it? Why don't you tell me what i should have assumed from the few facts i read in the headline?
Hey, look at that! RTFA and the picture shows an Indian guy who does not look Caucasian!
Anyway, I thought the Indian part was meaningless until i saw the article and noticed that he was still a citizen of India (and not a US citizen that came from Indian descent).
Because I promise you that if the SCOTUS had the arrogance to do this
What does arrogance have to do with this? If SCOTUS decides that it violates the constitution it is their duty to overturn them. Just because it is unpopular doesn't mean they should run away from the issue.
I sure hope I don't live through a time when an amendment is passed to limit people's rights. I'm embarrassed enough by my country's missteps.
Kinda like how openssh is morally wrong because you can buy directly from ssh.
Since when is using ideas developed by someone else morally wrong? Just think the moral quagmire we'd be in if scientists did shit like that. There are specific ways to protect ideas (and/or implementations): copyright, patent, trade secrets. You want to now extend these protections to any form of machine without some application process?
And who the HELL are you to be telling Torvalds how he should spend his time?
I did some research on him:
He is Mikael Johansson.
His slashdot ID is 814403.
And here is a link to his account in case you want to know more: http://slashdot.org/~Mikael%20Johansson.
In the US it is, if it is affixed to media. Or did you think that you had to file a patent for it under the Lanham act to get a copyright? Sorry, you loose.
I'm glad you posted as an AC. At least you were smart enought to check the AC checkbox.
Here's a big feature for you: - Real Tabbed browsing with a MDI interface - Zoom level
These 2 features are really holding me back from using FF all the time. I can't stand not having a MDI interface. Instead I get "dumb tabs." Want to view 2 windows--not happening. I just wish Opera would hurry up and add Ad blocking.
swap recipies, talk about retaurants,where to find good non-leather shoes,
Vegans eat shoes? yuck.
Or are you not familiar with the neopagan movement? (Which would be odd, since it has a hugely disproportionate presence in the tech sector.)
Maybe this should be a slashdot poll? I don't know many people that know about neopaganism. Although, now that you mention it, we did have a company prayer to Odin before our last product release.
Is your point that error correction is less efficient then not trying to correct errors? Because, guess what, you are right!
The post above mine has said "it's easy enough for SETI which will verify results..." My point is if you can do it for one mathematical calculation you can do it for certain other types of mathematical calculations. I know for certain that you can distribute ray-tracing work, because I worked for a startup that wrote a multiplatform, multithreaded, distributed renderer.
A controller would send out work and tile the returning image. The Poster above me has said that he would rather use 1 CPU that was reliable rather then distributed computations because he thinks "reliable" and "distributed" are mutually exclusive. I don't know a lot about error correcting but there are people much smarter then me that have solutions to this problem.
Uh, no. I'd know because I'd be using a protocol that verifies the work given back by each node by some method. I'm sure it could be fine tuned to verify some nodes more then others depending on the node's current rating for reliablity.
Intelligent people code from scratch -- unintelligent steal from others.
-1: Inane
So you're one of those intelligent people that writes their own sort functions? Forget about using standard libraries, write your own libraries, because that is what intelligent people do. Want to learn calculus? Come up with it on your own. Don't learn from other people, that's what unintelligent people do!
without the creators getting the revenue they expected...
What? Because they are guaranteed a certain amount of revenue under capitalism? Wrong.
Multiplayer games are usually sold at a price about equal to the subscription price included with the game (so the game is "free"). All of the money is in the server subscriptions.
So what? Companies are rewarded/punished for their decisions in the marketplace. If they want to sell it at a loss then that is their decision. Next you'll say it is illegal to make a cluster using Xboxes because they are sold at a loss and MS will lose money if you don't buy game titles.
Probably because they are demanding more from blockbuster? It was a settlement not a judgement, so I'm assuming that the other states are holding out for a bigger settlement.
Blockbuster wants to settle: Blockbuster spokeswoman, Karen Raskopf, said the settlement excluded the state of New Jersey, which last month filed a lawsuit accusing Blockbuster of failing to disclose key terms of its new rental policy.
``We continue to talk to them. We are hopeful we can reach a resolution with New Jersey,'' Raskopf said.
Thank you so much. I've only de-assified the start menu and control panel up until now. This is so much better. I always feel like i'm in grade school writing with giant crayons when i use XP.
The GPL is not some kind of "super contract" that overrides everything else. In fact, it's barely been proven in court up to this point.
As stated before, it is not a contract...and as stated before in better terms, the GPL grants distribution rights. The distribution rights are only valid for a certain number of cases. If you take away the GPL you lose those distribution rights.
Notice how it has not restricted how you distribute parts of code that you own the copyright too.
You mean that proving the "viral" GPL can somehow override their rights to their employee's creations?
This is such an innane comment. It's like saying "you mean that proving federal copyright law can somehow override their 'rights' to their employees' creations?"
Imagine that, laws, contracts, and licenses might limit what a corporation can do? Yeah, i'm sure that is a nail in the coffin. No companies expect to be bound by copyright law these days.
I don't mean to sound inflamatory, but I don't think you know what you're talking about.
So much so that we assume a product is ours once we buy it
You do own a product once you buy it...no need to assume.
If I go into a store and pay cash for an item, I am not bound by any policy that they make up that restricts my freedoms. Even if I sign a legally binding contract, there are certain rights that i cannot sign away. Take costco for an example. In the membership agreement with costco, I accept that my membership can be cancelled if I do not allow them to search my purchases on the way out. I can clearly refuse to have them search me, and they will cancel my membership; however, they cannot infringe upon my rights and force me to be searched.
Beside, BB "reserves the right" to search anybody when leaving the store including non-customers. Under you broken example anyone not paying for a product would not have to submit to a search. Just hand your bought items to your friend that didn't buy anything before leaving the store.
I have had this happen to me at the Galleria Mall in Cambridge, Ma.
I had stopped by BB after work on a Friday to pickup a laptop we needed for Monday. It was Valentines weekend and I was in a hurry to meet up with my g/f (yeah, i know i'm on slashdot so some of you pretend). I was on the phone with her while i left the store with my hands full, so i refused to stop at the exit to be searched. I was actually curious to see if the guy would lay his hands on me. I entered the mall and walked 100 yards down to a directory to find the easiest way out of the mall when i look up and the Manager and Assistant Manager of the store are in my face asking to see my receipt.
The manager ended up getting all red faced and pissed by my simple refusal to allow them to see my receipt. Eventually he has the balls to ask me why I am causing a disturbance. At this point, I tell him I'm not and to prove it will simply walk away and leave the mall. He tells me he will have me arrested. In 2 minutes he has three police officers around me--one older plainclothed cop (who was actually really nice). The uniformed cops were young intimidating assholes. They still acted like I had done something wrong. In the mean time i had shown the receipt to the assistant manager, because i realized that a lot of my time might be wasted by this and i was in a hurry.
If it hadn't been bought for work, i would have went right back inside and returned the laptop and told them I would get it from somewhere else.
You know that part of the deal is that you will be expected to allow your person to be searched. It is not a surprise. Yet, when the store asks you to complete the deal by being searched, you refuse.
But i have never agreed to this. Just like i cannot force you to follow my policy of charging everyone who reads my comments to pay me $500. Are you trying to say that there is some kind of contract/agreement made where-as i give up certain rights to shop at their store. I don't think so.
And what about when it is a suprise? What makes you think that I give up my rights because I entered a store?
Slashdot Mirror
WTF?
Is patent really the correct protection to use for a UI? The better have invented some amazing ideas for their UI.
Someone should have patented the remote control. They would have made billions!
Wow, you have illuminated the main point the Republicans have been trying to make for years. They have managed to instill such cynicism in the American people on purpose so people will be so jaded as to say such stupid and untrue things as "well, the Republicans aren't any worse then the other side."
But it's not true. The fact that you repeat such inane and untrue statements as in your post tells me that you've only followed sound bites for the last 4 years (maybe 20 years?).
How ignorant can you be when this is the FIRST time people were denied access to a IATC Meeting because of which presidential candidate they donated money to?
Heck, you're the one assuming he's not Caucasian just because he's of Indian descent.
Wrong. I'm assuming it also. Is that, ok? Why would i not assume it? Why don't you tell me what i should have assumed from the few facts i read in the headline?
Hey, look at that! RTFA and the picture shows an Indian guy who does not look Caucasian!
Anyway, I thought the Indian part was meaningless until i saw the article and noticed that he was still a citizen of India (and not a US citizen that came from Indian descent).
Luckily, the free version isn't supported by ads...
Because I promise you that if the SCOTUS had the arrogance to do this
What does arrogance have to do with this? If SCOTUS decides that it violates the constitution it is their duty to overturn them. Just because it is unpopular doesn't mean they should run away from the issue.
I sure hope I don't live through a time when an amendment is passed to limit people's rights. I'm embarrassed enough by my country's missteps.
Kinda like how openssh is morally wrong because you can buy directly from ssh.
Since when is using ideas developed by someone else morally wrong? Just think the moral quagmire we'd be in if scientists did shit like that. There are specific ways to protect ideas (and/or implementations): copyright, patent, trade secrets. You want to now extend these protections to any form of machine without some application process?
And who the HELL are you to be telling Torvalds how he should spend his time?
I did some research on him:
He is Mikael Johansson.
His slashdot ID is 814403.
And here is a link to his account in case you want to know more: http://slashdot.org/~Mikael%20Johansson.
In the US it is, if it is affixed to media. Or did you think that you had to file a patent for it under the Lanham act to get a copyright? Sorry, you loose.
I'm glad you posted as an AC. At least you were smart enought to check the AC checkbox.
Here's a big feature for you:
- Real Tabbed browsing with a MDI interface
- Zoom level
These 2 features are really holding me back from using FF all the time. I can't stand not having a MDI interface. Instead I get "dumb tabs." Want to view 2 windows--not happening. I just wish Opera would hurry up and add Ad blocking.
I think the same thing will happen for these air scooters.
They will starting rolling and eventually come to a stop.
If you don't like it, they're not forcing you to use their service.
But they are forcing me to pay for it.
swap recipies, talk about retaurants,where to find good non-leather shoes,
Vegans eat shoes? yuck.
Or are you not familiar with the neopagan movement? (Which would be odd, since it has a hugely disproportionate presence in the tech sector.)
Maybe this should be a slashdot poll? I don't know many people that know about neopaganism. Although, now that you mention it, we did have a company prayer to Odin before our last product release.
Is your point that error correction is less efficient then not trying to correct errors? Because, guess what, you are right!
The post above mine has said "it's easy enough for SETI which will verify results..." My point is if you can do it for one mathematical calculation you can do it for certain other types of mathematical calculations. I know for certain that you can distribute ray-tracing work, because I worked for a startup that wrote a multiplatform, multithreaded, distributed renderer.
A controller would send out work and tile the returning image. The Poster above me has said that he would rather use 1 CPU that was reliable rather then distributed computations because he thinks "reliable" and "distributed" are mutually exclusive. I don't know a lot about error correcting but there are people much smarter then me that have solutions to this problem.
and you'd never know until you saw it.
Uh, no. I'd know because I'd be using a protocol that verifies the work given back by each node by some method. I'm sure it could be fine tuned to verify some nodes more then others depending on the node's current rating for reliablity.
Intelligent people code from scratch -- unintelligent steal from others.
-1: Inane
So you're one of those intelligent people that writes their own sort functions? Forget about using standard libraries, write your own libraries, because that is what intelligent people do. Want to learn calculus? Come up with it on your own. Don't learn from other people, that's what unintelligent people do!
without the creators getting the revenue they expected...
What? Because they are guaranteed a certain amount of revenue under capitalism? Wrong.
Multiplayer games are usually sold at a price about equal to the subscription price included with the game (so the game is "free"). All of the money is in the server subscriptions.
So what? Companies are rewarded/punished for their decisions in the marketplace. If they want to sell it at a loss then that is their decision. Next you'll say it is illegal to make a cluster using Xboxes because they are sold at a loss and MS will lose money if you don't buy game titles.
I shouldn't even respond to an A/C.
Why?
Probably because they are demanding more from blockbuster? It was a settlement not a judgement, so I'm assuming that the other states are holding out for a bigger settlement.
Blockbuster wants to settle:
Blockbuster spokeswoman, Karen Raskopf, said the settlement excluded the state of New Jersey, which last month filed a lawsuit accusing Blockbuster of failing to disclose key terms of its new rental policy.
``We continue to talk to them. We are hopeful we can reach a resolution with New Jersey,'' Raskopf said.
This is excellent news. Stupid blockbuster.
Wow!
Thank you so much. I've only de-assified the start menu and control panel up until now. This is so much better. I always feel like i'm in grade school writing with giant crayons when i use XP.
The GPL is not some kind of "super contract" that overrides everything else. In fact, it's barely been proven in court up to this point.
As stated before, it is not a contract...and as stated before in better terms, the GPL grants distribution rights. The distribution rights are only valid for a certain number of cases. If you take away the GPL you lose those distribution rights. Notice how it has not restricted how you distribute parts of code that you own the copyright too.
You mean that proving the "viral" GPL can somehow override their rights to their employee's creations?
This is such an innane comment. It's like saying "you mean that proving federal copyright law can somehow override their 'rights' to their employees' creations?"
Imagine that, laws, contracts, and licenses might limit what a corporation can do? Yeah, i'm sure that is a nail in the coffin. No companies expect to be bound by copyright law these days.
4th post
I don't mean to sound inflamatory, but I don't think you know what you're talking about.
So much so that we assume a product is ours once we buy it
You do own a product once you buy it...no need to assume.
If I go into a store and pay cash for an item, I am not bound by any policy that they make up that restricts my freedoms. Even if I sign a legally binding contract, there are certain rights that i cannot sign away. Take costco for an example. In the membership agreement with costco, I accept that my membership can be cancelled if I do not allow them to search my purchases on the way out. I can clearly refuse to have them search me, and they will cancel my membership; however, they cannot infringe upon my rights and force me to be searched.
Beside, BB "reserves the right" to search anybody when leaving the store including non-customers. Under you broken example anyone not paying for a product would not have to submit to a search. Just hand your bought items to your friend that didn't buy anything before leaving the store.
I have had this happen to me at the Galleria Mall in Cambridge, Ma.
I had stopped by BB after work on a Friday to pickup a laptop we needed for Monday. It was Valentines weekend and I was in a hurry to meet up with my g/f (yeah, i know i'm on slashdot so some of you pretend). I was on the phone with her while i left the store with my hands full, so i refused to stop at the exit to be searched. I was actually curious to see if the guy would lay his hands on me. I entered the mall and walked 100 yards down to a directory to find the easiest way out of the mall when i look up and the Manager and Assistant Manager of the store are in my face asking to see my receipt.
The manager ended up getting all red faced and pissed by my simple refusal to allow them to see my receipt. Eventually he has the balls to ask me why I am causing a disturbance. At this point, I tell him I'm not and to prove it will simply walk away and leave the mall. He tells me he will have me arrested. In 2 minutes he has three police officers around me--one older plainclothed cop (who was actually really nice). The uniformed cops were young intimidating assholes. They still acted like I had done something wrong. In the mean time i had shown the receipt to the assistant manager, because i realized that a lot of my time might be wasted by this and i was in a hurry.
If it hadn't been bought for work, i would have went right back inside and returned the laptop and told them I would get it from somewhere else.
You know that part of the deal is that you will be expected to allow your person to be searched. It is not a surprise. Yet, when the store asks you to complete the deal by being searched, you refuse.
But i have never agreed to this. Just like i cannot force you to follow my policy of charging everyone who reads my comments to pay me $500. Are you trying to say that there is some kind of contract/agreement made where-as i give up certain rights to shop at their store. I don't think so.
And what about when it is a suprise? What makes you think that I give up my rights because I entered a store?