How many Wii have been sold in the US? 50,000? </blockquote>
<p>Closer to <a href="http://www.nintendo.co.jp/n10/news/070125e.p df">1.25 million</a> (a little under that since those stats would be for NA). You are right that it is not "universal," but 50,000 is a ridiculous underestimate.
I am not a lawyer, but on what do you base this supposed infringement of title 17?
From 17 602(b):
In a case where the copies or phonorecords were lawfully made, the United States Customs Service has no authority to prevent their importation unless the provisions of section 601 are applicable.
Apple just hasn't shown, in the last 10 years, any reluctance to abandon existing, home-grown, technologies when the market has provided an adequate alternative.
While your statement is basically true, your application of it to MP3 vs. AAC is... bad. AAC is not "home-grown." The Advanced Audio Coding (AAC) is specified as part of the MPEG 4 standard and it is superior to mp3s in a variety of ways.
Except Excel's charting and annotating is still far superior to OO
<p>...</p>
<p>Excel's charting capabilities are horrible and they don't scale well. They may be better than OOo's, but that's not saying much.</p>
<p>R is excellent if you don't mind a little command line. There is also Golden Software's <a href="http://www.goldensoftware.com/products/graph er/grapher.shtml">Grapher</a>, though it is hardly free.</p>
You are fixating on one example and missing the point.
Pythagoras, Euclid, etc were largely theoretical, despite that their later application. While newton's work was done hand-in-hand with physics, that wasn't necessarily true of Leibniz. Euler's work gets used everywhere, but a lot of it had no practical application at the time. Fourier's transform only became truly useful after the advent of the FFT. Riemann's work has ramifications in crypto.
"Why do we still teach CS and engineering majors tons of higher math?"
Of all of the classes I took in college, my mathematics-heavy ones were by and far the most valuable.
Why? Three reasons.
1) I personally use it in my day-to-day jobs. Maybe I'm unusual, but I've been hired as a Software Engineer specifically because I have a stronger math background than most "CS" people.
2) Knowing a broad scope of higher mathematics helps me identify what might work and what might not work for a given problem.
3) The more mathematics you have, the easier it is to change careers if SE isn't your cup of tea (or get into more interesting work if it is). To paraphrase I quote I read once: listen carefully when you decide you've taken your last math class, you might be able to hear the sound of closing doors.
4) A great deal of "higher level math" is about proofs, which are about problem solving and critical thinking. What do you think software engineering is?
In school I took a class in Complex Analysis as an elective. I have not (yet) used it in the "real world," but I firmly believe the practice with problem solving was worth its weight in gold.
Sure, if all you are going to do is database administration in an IT capacity or working on GUIs with SWT, "higher math" *might* not be necessary. I personally don't like being so constrained.
The AMA lost the case, being found guilty of conspiracy and restraint of trade, in 1987. Before 1983 it had as a policy that it was unethical for medical doctors to associate with those in "unscientific cults." It included chiropractic on this list.
The LGPL, and its fairly small and light, so I doubt they'd have to modify it. If they do, then they still get to wait until they release the product before releasing the changes.
You do realize many people who have credit cards never carry forward a balance, right? Further, you realize that some significant minority of those who do are doing so to build a credit base for a future loan (e.g., for a mortgage or for a leveraged investment).
Not to mention a convenience factor (when I last purchased a computer, I put it down on a credit card and then paid off the card that month, I could not have done that with the limits on my debit card). It also is not always a trivial proposition to rent a car or skis with a debit card.
Credit cards aren't the problem. Irresponsible spending is.
I seem to recall that Jobs said it was "1% by 2008"
By 2008 several things will have happened. First, I'd anticipate that the price will have dropped by then. Second, anyone want to take a bet that the "multiyear exclusive deal" with Cingular is 2 years? Third, it will have undergone at least one revision (possibly with an "iPhone Mini" or somesuch in the middle). Finally, a lot of people will be buying new cell phones and possibly changing providers.
1% sounds extremely high to me as well, but it has to be kept in mind that they aren't talking immediately and this thing does a lot more than most smartphones.
0) Don't "roll your own" security unless absolutely necessary. Find someone else's implementations and work with those.
1) Design the code for security, code to that design. I've seen of security bugs creep into code because it was never designed to be secure.
2) Use static code checkers--such as Splint for C/C++ and FindBugs for Java--that look for security vulnerabilities.
3) Peer reviews/code audits. Sit down with your code (and have others who know how to look for security vulnerabilities sit down with your code) and do a full review.
Nothing is foolproof, but every little bit helps. It should be noted that all of the above also improve the overall quality of the code and reduce the number of overall bugs: Finding existent implementations of features that can be used can reduce maintenance and reduce bugs; Designing the code and putting it through a proper design review can catch a lot of logic problems and ensure that the code fits the requirements list--I've seen a huge number of synchronization bugs in Java simply because the author didn't know how to use synchronization properly; static code checkers find a lot more than just security bugs; and Peer Reviews/Code Audits can help isolate a variety of problems.
If they were truly interested in "improving MacOS X" or "improving practices on the management side of Apple" then they would release these bugs to Apple first. Don't wait an insane amount of time, but give them a nice reasonable amount of time to fix the bugs. Heck, even tell them you plan on releasing them on thus and so date and start the month *then*, giving props to Apple for those they have fixed.
Slashdot Mirror
I am not a lawyer, but on what do you base this supposed infringement of title 17?
From 17 602(b):
It actually is often cheaper to order the CD from the local amazon (e.g., amazon.jp) and have it ship them to you.
...
So close, and yet not quite there.
While your statement is basically true, your application of it to MP3 vs. AAC is... bad. AAC is not "home-grown." The Advanced Audio Coding (AAC) is specified as part of the MPEG 4 standard and it is superior to mp3s in a variety of ways.
Precisely how much do you think it would take, in terms of money and support, for Apple to do that?
"and we will have to turn to Congress to create rules that are better adapted for the information age"
Oh that's good, tell another one!
<p>...</p>
<p>Excel's charting capabilities are horrible and they don't scale well. They may be better than OOo's, but that's not saying much.</p>
<p>R is excellent if you don't mind a little command line. There is also Golden Software's <a href="http://www.goldensoftware.com/products/grap
In the Brown Medical School Class of 2010 49% majored in humanities, 45% in physical and life sciences.
You are fixating on one example and missing the point.
Pythagoras, Euclid, etc were largely theoretical, despite that their later application. While newton's work was done hand-in-hand with physics, that wasn't necessarily true of Leibniz. Euler's work gets used everywhere, but a lot of it had no practical application at the time. Fourier's transform only became truly useful after the advent of the FFT. Riemann's work has ramifications in crypto.
"Why do we still teach CS and engineering majors tons of higher math?"
Of all of the classes I took in college, my mathematics-heavy ones were by and far the most valuable.
Why? Three reasons.
1) I personally use it in my day-to-day jobs. Maybe I'm unusual, but I've been hired as a Software Engineer specifically because I have a stronger math background than most "CS" people.
2) Knowing a broad scope of higher mathematics helps me identify what might work and what might not work for a given problem.
3) The more mathematics you have, the easier it is to change careers if SE isn't your cup of tea (or get into more interesting work if it is). To paraphrase I quote I read once: listen carefully when you decide you've taken your last math class, you might be able to hear the sound of closing doors.
4) A great deal of "higher level math" is about proofs, which are about problem solving and critical thinking. What do you think software engineering is?
In school I took a class in Complex Analysis as an elective. I have not (yet) used it in the "real world," but I firmly believe the practice with problem solving was worth its weight in gold.
Sure, if all you are going to do is database administration in an IT capacity or working on GUIs with SWT, "higher math" *might* not be necessary. I personally don't like being so constrained.
Look up Wilk v. the AMA
The AMA lost the case, being found guilty of conspiracy and restraint of trade, in 1987. Before 1983 it had as a policy that it was unethical for medical doctors to associate with those in "unscientific cults." It included chiropractic on this list.
" It may eventually be possible to use specially treated gypsum instead of glass window panes."
The LGPL, and its fairly small and light, so I doubt they'd have to modify it. If they do, then they still get to wait until they release the product before releasing the changes.
You do realize many people who have credit cards never carry forward a balance, right? Further, you realize that some significant minority of those who do are doing so to build a credit base for a future loan (e.g., for a mortgage or for a leveraged investment).
Not to mention a convenience factor (when I last purchased a computer, I put it down on a credit card and then paid off the card that month, I could not have done that with the limits on my debit card). It also is not always a trivial proposition to rent a car or skis with a debit card.
Credit cards aren't the problem. Irresponsible spending is.
Wrong about the iPod... the iPod Mini... the iMac...
I seem to recall that Jobs said it was "1% by 2008"
By 2008 several things will have happened. First, I'd anticipate that the price will have dropped by then. Second, anyone want to take a bet that the "multiyear exclusive deal" with Cingular is 2 years? Third, it will have undergone at least one revision (possibly with an "iPhone Mini" or somesuch in the middle). Finally, a lot of people will be buying new cell phones and possibly changing providers.
1% sounds extremely high to me as well, but it has to be kept in mind that they aren't talking immediately and this thing does a lot more than most smartphones.
So does this mean the iPhone is doomed?
The very first iPod was priced at $399 and a Sidekick is $500 (albeit before rebates and discounts).
Both the Cingular requirement and the price are (individually) dealkillers for me, but this may still have a significant market.
0) Don't "roll your own" security unless absolutely necessary. Find someone else's implementations and work with those.
1) Design the code for security, code to that design. I've seen of security bugs creep into code because it was never designed to be secure.
2) Use static code checkers--such as Splint for C/C++ and FindBugs for Java--that look for security vulnerabilities.
3) Peer reviews/code audits. Sit down with your code (and have others who know how to look for security vulnerabilities sit down with your code) and do a full review.
Nothing is foolproof, but every little bit helps. It should be noted that all of the above also improve the overall quality of the code and reduce the number of overall bugs: Finding existent implementations of features that can be used can reduce maintenance and reduce bugs; Designing the code and putting it through a proper design review can catch a lot of logic problems and ensure that the code fits the requirements list--I've seen a huge number of synchronization bugs in Java simply because the author didn't know how to use synchronization properly; static code checkers find a lot more than just security bugs; and Peer Reviews/Code Audits can help isolate a variety of problems.
Your school doesn't have a computer science program, does it?
This is why Apache is less secure than IIS, right?
Oh wait...
No wireless. Less space than a nomad. Lame.
You don't happen to work in my office, do you? :p
Just anecdotally, I've seen a few cases where the entire team was great, the problems existed above the boss at the level that manages him or her.
If they were truly interested in "improving MacOS X" or "improving practices on the management side of Apple" then they would release these bugs to Apple first. Don't wait an insane amount of time, but give them a nice reasonable amount of time to fix the bugs. Heck, even tell them you plan on releasing them on thus and so date and start the month *then*, giving props to Apple for those they have fixed.