I believe that the main impetus behind XML Schema was to get a description language that was also XML so that one parser could operate on both the document and that document's description (meta information).
What surprises me is that no one seems to think it's odd that it seems to be OK (ie legal) for Microsoft to change the EULA from what you originally agreed to in order for you to install security patches.
There has got to be something wrong with extracting a payment (ie agreement to a new license) in order to get a needed fix to an already paid for product.
I have no intention of installing sp3 for Win2k unless they change that EULA, no way am I agreeing that MS can have access to my system.
Now perhaps, if due to this fact hackers gain access to my system through a security hole that sp3 would have patched, I can sue MS for charging for a fix to a broken product. You don't see the car companies charging for the fixes when there is a problem that requires a recall, and that costs them a lot more than the service pack costs MS.
OK, I'm not sure how much of a case there really is here, but I'd sure like to see someone try!
Mike
Re:but that's not the standard Windows keybinding
on
Gaim For Windows
·
· Score: 1
Actually it that keybinding did not come from DOS, it came from MS Windows. At some point (I don't remember when) MS changed from specifying ctrl-ins, shift-del and shift-ins to ctrl-c, ctrl-x and ctrl-v which were basically the Mac key bindings. I think this happened somewhere between Windows 3.0 and Windows 95.
In many ways this change made sense since the new bindings are easier for right-handed users. However the old key bindings are much easier for left-handed users (and as one of those users I'm glad they are still supported in almost all applications, and it annoys me a lot when they aren't!)
To some extent that also goes for alt-BS and alt-ins for undo and redo, although those alternates aren't supported nearly as often, as the ones for cut, copy and paste.
Mike
That way, the new guy doesn't bollux up an investigation by committing some mistake which a defense attorney can present as a violation of his client's rights and grounds for dismissal.
The FBI? Are you kidding?!?!! The FBI doesn't release any documents to a defense attorney! Those are classified!
I agree with the build your own system sentiment, and I do build my own desktops, but I'd like to get a laptop, and building your own isn't really feasible.
Personally I would probably install a windows OS on my new laptop, but I don't like the version that the OEMs have to ship, ie I want one that I can move to a different machine if I'd like, and I want the CD.
In addition to the OS have you noticed what's happening with Dell and the other Microsoft software that they make you buy?
I'm talking about MS Office. I was configuring a laptop on the Dell site, and I had to select a Microsoft productivity package. I could pick from one of 2 Office packages, or Microsoft Works.
The cheapest Office added $180 to the cost of the laptop over Works, and you didn't even have a choice of works if you selected any laptop except the lowest end (processor and display) model!
This is so bogus. I don't need all of the crap that comes with MS Office. I particularly don't like Office XP (I'd prefer to stick with Office 97) and I am planning on trying StarOffice or equivilant for my word processing needs. I already use Eudora for email (I absolutely Hate Outlook!)
Except that the same way they are going to modify the software on the PVR you currently own and use to record your actions, they can change the software to force you to watch the commercials also.
I don't think (I don't own one so I'm not sure about this) that you can prevent a software upgrade [sic] from being downloaded and installed unless you never connect to the SonicBlue or Tivo service.
Well I'm not sure this is the easiest solution, since it costs money, but I bet that with a learner's permit she could find a driving school that would teach her/give her practice to take the road test.
Also, I very much doubt that a driver's license is required to OWN a car. You can buy a car and register it without having a driver's license.
Mike
ps I am appalled by the requirements in CT to submit biometric data, like fingerprints in order to get a driver's license.
While you do list many of the negative aspects of an electric car, you are
completely glossing over some of the equivalent negative aspects of a gas
powered car.
Namely, that the energy expended getting the gas to the car is not zero, it
is a sigificant amount. This includes refining the gas for use in cars as well
as storing and transporting it to the many distribution locations.
Also, gas and oil are pretty toxic stuff, and small amounts
can contaminate large areas. Cleaning up the ground where a gas station used
to be is a big project.
In addition, I would guess (having absolutely no real
numbers or knowledge to base this on) that the efficiency of the average car gas engine at
extracting energy from its fuel is not as high as if the energy of that fuel
was extracted in a power plant. I am basing this statement on the knowledge
that many cars engines are not well maintained, and on economies of scale (I'm
assuming that the requirements for a powerplant engine make it inherently more
efficient in design than a car engine).
I also believe it is much easier to get much better polution control in a
central location like a power plant, than in millions of cars.
Lastly, yes the majority of our electricty does come from fossil fuels, however
there are other sources.
So while I agree that electric cars are not the panacea that some would have us
believe, they are not as bad a solution as you would have us believe either.
I don't want it if it doesn't let me time-shift!
on
I STILL Want My HDTV
·
· Score: 2, Informative
I've actually been looking forward to HDTV for years. I like the 16x9 aspect ratio, and the clarity of the picture is awesome.
However, I am really sceptical about all of this copy protection that I keep hearing is going to be incorporated.
I watch almost no TV live, I record it and watch it later. And some (a very small amount) shows that I particularly like, I save the tapes so that I can watch them years later (currently only Buffy the Vampire Slayer:). And yes, I have lent my tapes to friends who had starting watching the show in the 3rd season and wanted to see what had happened in the 1st 2. If the move to HDTV takes away my ability to do this, then I don't want it.
Very well said. And copyright itself is a privelege not a right! The government (ie what should be us in a republic) grants via law a limited time ownership of original works. Its sole purpose in doing this is to foster the sharing of more original works which it is hoped will help the society advance. After this time, everyone in the society is allowed to freely use those ideas. That's what the public domain is.
This has gotten completely out of hand with our current government giving away copyright for periods far longer than they should, mostly to protect the income of large corporations.
I would feel happiest with a system which limits copyright to the right of a creator to receive credit and acknowledgement for their work.
You know, I've been thinking and arguing with friends about copyright for a couple of years now, and I pretty much feel as you do.
I would be willing to give a "copyright" to the creator (an individual) for a short period (definitely not exceeding 20 years, and I was thinking more like 5) during which no one else could profit from their work. To me this means that uses of their work that was not for profit (and that includes sharing by individuals) would be perfectly reasonable. I also agree that plagarizing (passing off someone else's ideas/work as your own) is going to far. Although that might be a hard line to draw, I am willing to draw it.
The Limiting Copyright website has proved to be a very interesting source of information.
While that may be true, I don't think it applies in this case. After all our society is based on a rule of law which is for the public good.
And it is a rule of law that grants a copyright or the concept of intellectual property.
That concept--copyright--was created to enhance the public good. It is now being used to enhance some private good because it has been stretched way beyond its original purpose at the behest of those it would benefit (via corporate political contributions and lobbyists).
I can see why a limited copyright benefits the public good. It encourages the publication and sharing of ideas. I merely think that our govenment has lost that focus of the reason for taking away some of my rights to copy whatever I like for the public good.
After all once I've experienced something why shouldn't I be able to use that experience (whether hearing a song, reading a book etc) in any way I like including repeating it for my own personal benefit?
Check out www.limitingcopyright.com for other really interesting articles on the subject of copyright.
Mike
Slashdot Mirror
I believe that the main impetus behind XML Schema was to get a description language that was also XML so that one parser could operate on both the document and that document's description (meta information).
You know, I seem to have encountered mention of Hitler or Nazis in several of the threads I've browsed in the last week or two.
It just made me wonder if Godwin's law also applies to /.?
And if it does, what does it mean when those posts are modded up?!?
Mike
What surprises me is that no one seems to think it's odd that it seems to be OK (ie legal) for Microsoft to change the EULA from what you originally agreed to in order for you to install security patches.
There has got to be something wrong with extracting a payment (ie agreement to a new license) in order to get a needed fix to an already paid for product.
I have no intention of installing sp3 for Win2k unless they change that EULA, no way am I agreeing that MS can have access to my system.
Now perhaps, if due to this fact hackers gain access to my system through a security hole that sp3 would have patched, I can sue MS for charging for a fix to a broken product. You don't see the car companies charging for the fixes when there is a problem that requires a recall, and that costs them a lot more than the service pack costs MS.
OK, I'm not sure how much of a case there really is here, but I'd sure like to see someone try!
Mike
Actually it that keybinding did not come from DOS, it came from MS Windows. At some point (I don't remember when) MS changed from specifying ctrl-ins, shift-del and shift-ins to ctrl-c, ctrl-x and ctrl-v which were basically the Mac key bindings. I think this happened somewhere between Windows 3.0 and Windows 95.
In many ways this change made sense since the new bindings are easier for right-handed users. However the old key bindings are much easier for left-handed users (and as one of those users I'm glad they are still supported in almost all applications, and it annoys me a lot when they aren't!) To some extent that also goes for alt-BS and alt-ins for undo and redo, although those alternates aren't supported nearly as often, as the ones for cut, copy and paste. Mike
That way, the new guy doesn't bollux up an investigation by committing some mistake which a defense attorney can present as a violation of his client's rights and grounds for dismissal.
The FBI? Are you kidding?!?!! The FBI doesn't release any documents to a defense attorney! Those are classified!
:-)
Mike
I agree with the build your own system sentiment, and I do build my own desktops, but I'd like to get a laptop, and building your own isn't really feasible.
Personally I would probably install a windows OS on my new laptop, but I don't like the version that the OEMs have to ship, ie I want one that I can move to a different machine if I'd like, and I want the CD.
In addition to the OS have you noticed what's happening with Dell and the other Microsoft software that they make you buy?
I'm talking about MS Office. I was configuring a laptop on the Dell site, and I had to select a Microsoft productivity package. I could pick from one of 2 Office packages, or Microsoft Works.
The cheapest Office added $180 to the cost of the laptop over Works, and you didn't even have a choice of works if you selected any laptop except the lowest end (processor and display) model!
This is so bogus. I don't need all of the crap that comes with MS Office. I particularly don't like Office XP (I'd prefer to stick with Office 97) and I am planning on trying StarOffice or equivilant for my word processing needs. I already use Eudora for email (I absolutely Hate Outlook!)
Mike
Except that the same way they are going to modify the software on the PVR you currently own and use to record your actions, they can change the software to force you to watch the commercials also.
I don't think (I don't own one so I'm not sure about this) that you can prevent a software upgrade [sic] from being downloaded and installed unless you never connect to the SonicBlue or Tivo service.
Mike
Also, I very much doubt that a driver's license is required to OWN a car. You can buy a car and register it without having a driver's license.
Mike
ps I am appalled by the requirements in CT to submit biometric data, like fingerprints in order to get a driver's license.
yeah like any MS product, it's not going to be usable to the 3rd version, or in this case...the Z-box. Mike
While you do list many of the negative aspects of an electric car, you are completely glossing over some of the equivalent negative aspects of a gas powered car.
Namely, that the energy expended getting the gas to the car is not zero, it is a sigificant amount. This includes refining the gas for use in cars as well as storing and transporting it to the many distribution locations.
Also, gas and oil are pretty toxic stuff, and small amounts can contaminate large areas. Cleaning up the ground where a gas station used to be is a big project.
In addition, I would guess (having absolutely no real numbers or knowledge to base this on) that the efficiency of the average car gas engine at extracting energy from its fuel is not as high as if the energy of that fuel was extracted in a power plant. I am basing this statement on the knowledge that many cars engines are not well maintained, and on economies of scale (I'm assuming that the requirements for a powerplant engine make it inherently more efficient in design than a car engine).
I also believe it is much easier to get much better polution control in a central location like a power plant, than in millions of cars.
Lastly, yes the majority of our electricty does come from fossil fuels, however there are other sources.
So while I agree that electric cars are not the panacea that some would have us believe, they are not as bad a solution as you would have us believe either.
I've actually been looking forward to HDTV for years. I like the 16x9 aspect ratio, and the clarity of the picture is awesome.
However, I am really sceptical about all of this copy protection that I keep hearing is going to be incorporated.
I watch almost no TV live, I record it and watch it later. And some (a very small amount) shows that I particularly like, I save the tapes so that I can watch them years later (currently only Buffy the Vampire Slayer :). And yes, I have lent my tapes to friends who had starting watching the show in the 3rd season and wanted to see what had happened in the 1st 2. If the move to HDTV takes away my ability to do this, then I don't want it.
MikeVery well said. And copyright itself is a privelege not a right! The government (ie what should be us in a republic) grants via law a limited time ownership of original works. Its sole purpose in doing this is to foster the sharing of more original works which it is hoped will help the society advance. After this time, everyone in the society is allowed to freely use those ideas. That's what the public domain is.
This has gotten completely out of hand with our current government giving away copyright for periods far longer than they should, mostly to protect the income of large corporations.
check out Limiting Copyright for some interesting articles on this.
Mike
I would feel happiest with a system which limits copyright to the right of a creator to receive credit and acknowledgement for their work.
You know, I've been thinking and arguing with friends about copyright for a couple of years now, and I pretty much feel as you do.
I would be willing to give a "copyright" to the creator (an individual) for a short period (definitely not exceeding 20 years, and I was thinking more like 5) during which no one else could profit from their work. To me this means that uses of their work that was not for profit (and that includes sharing by individuals) would be perfectly reasonable. I also agree that plagarizing (passing off someone else's ideas/work as your own) is going to far. Although that might be a hard line to draw, I am willing to draw it.
The Limiting Copyright website has proved to be a very interesting source of information.
Mike L.While that may be true, I don't think it applies in this case. After all our society is based on a rule of law which is for the public good.
And it is a rule of law that grants a copyright or the concept of intellectual property.
That concept--copyright--was created to enhance the public good. It is now being used to enhance some private good because it has been stretched way beyond its original purpose at the behest of those it would benefit (via corporate political contributions and lobbyists).
I can see why a limited copyright benefits the public good. It encourages the publication and sharing of ideas. I merely think that our govenment has lost that focus of the reason for taking away some of my rights to copy whatever I like for the public good.
After all once I've experienced something why shouldn't I be able to use that experience (whether hearing a song, reading a book etc) in any way I like including repeating it for my own personal benefit?
Check out www.limitingcopyright.com for other really interesting articles on the subject of copyright. Mike