Rail requires massive capital investment, which is the one thing that the US auto industry conspicuously lacks. Maybe *somebody* ought to invest in rail, but it's hard to see what GM et al can bring to that table.
Essentially, every debt has a risk. Risk determines interest rate. 2 week commercial paper for Ford has a different risk to 2 year commercial paper for Ford (which is different again to GM etc etc). You might have confidence Ford can pay up in 2 weeks, but you're not sure if the economy will tank in 2 years.
Now if Ford needs money for a certain period of time, whether to finance some car leases that are expiring in a month, or to finance some new ones that expire in 2 years, they've got to go to the market who will evaluate all the details of the risk and make you pay the appropriate rate.
The complexity of the system is people's attempt to defray risk. The problem is, the risk of the entire system became too aggressive, so all this defrayment of risk meant that nobody had more risk than anyone else, but everyone had too much.
It seems to me if you bought half a dozen 500GB drives, then in 10 years time at least one (probably most) of them will still work. Get different brands, different sizes to guard against particular problems. Maybe even do the 4GB Flash thing as well, and get some good quality DVDs too. I think the key here is not to put all your eggs in one basket. This is an open research question, and we may be interested how your solutions go in 10 years time.
Oh, if you want to be *really* sure, do the Mormon gold plates thing.
I think average programmers can understand virtual functions, templates and multiple inheritance, but perhaps not the way C++ implements it. C++ makes powerful concepts complicated, because it tries too hard to be close to the metal. Try Eiffel as a language that has these things in a more understandable way.
You're talking nonsense. The same Chinese companies that make Apple computers also make Acers, HPs etc etc. When Apple gets more share, HP calls China and says "make 3 million less laptops". Then Apple calls the same people and says "make 3 million more laptops".
1) If they are still in the new book channel, then that's a totally different scenario. When the channel is cleared there may well be another print run. I suppose ethically, they should be given a fair period of time to choose to make another print run.
If some guy in Texas picked up the last few copies, and wants to on-sell them, how much effort am I supposed to expend to locate that seller? Am I supposed to spend 5 years trawling the world for the last copies? I don't think so. A few last copies in the channel is the risk for those who want to take it.
3) So you should have a reasonable time, maybe a year or two since the main channel is cleared, to make the second run. If you don't bother, and it diminishes future runs, I think tough luck. The world can't sit on tenterhooks waiting to see what you will do.
1) Copyright laws are not there to protect the "book market" as some kind of ephemeral whole. They are to protect creators of works.
2) Copyright laws are not there to protect used book sellers.
3) True, but the ultimate aim of copyright is to encourage production and distribution of creative works. When the owner lets them go out of print they are abusing the system.
I can see the logic, but I don't want to clog my limited house up with more dead trees. So I could buy the book and burn it, but it's against my prinicples to be wasteful like that.
If the author isn't going to make $$$ anyway, why not at least save the environment?
I'm pretty sure the contracts would have been vague enough that there are no refunds. Something along the lines of "we indemnify you against all IP issues that may or may not exist".
Ironically, Linux used to be a stupid hobby for a Finnish boy, but not to be taken seriously. Now Linux is mainstream, and AIX is too marginal to be a real platform any more. Same for Irix and HP-UX, SCO, Unixware and a whole of other Nixes. Solaris seems to be moving in that direction too.
Right, because an app != a window. What if you alt-tabbed to Safari so you could open a NEW window? It would be damned annoying to have some other window pop up.
"On some Apple made apps closing the main windows does not close the app, on others (still made by apple) it does."
Right, and there is a good reason for which one is which. Your point is?
"I Spend more time in my day fighting the mac interface than I do getting productive work done."
What a lot of nonsense.
"If you install FileMaker server on OSX Server it will overwrite your php.ini file with it's own idea of the settings you need."
Are you sure you can't use Hibernate? It has a lot of hooks. At least tell me you've read the book by the Hibernate author. I think you might regret bailing on it. Harder requirements need better tools to get the job done, not crappier tools like JDBC.
Let's say for the sake of argument that some advanced alien space travelling race created life on earth and guided its advancement over time through genetic engineering.
There's no reason in principle why this fact, if it was a fact, could not be subjected to scientific investigation.
If we substitute divine being for alien being, nothing changes in principle.
Whether you think actual real life creationists have any scientific credibility is one thing. But to a-priori claim that creationism can't be science, is itself unscientific.
I would think that if Josh took the copy knowing full well what it was, there would be an implied authorization. Not to mention that in the P2P case, it is the downloader who initiates the copying and distribution cycle.
It hasn't been "rewritten" over and over. Scholars pretty much know what the original said, give or take the odd word here or there. That's because there are abundant manuscripts and ancient versions. There isn't much controversial here, no matter what your religious beliefs. Even the most divergent of manuscripts are still the same bible, and a typical man in the pew probably wouldn't notice which manuscript it was translated from.
If you attempt to learn a language for the sake of your computer career you will almost certainly fail. But if you learn because you are fascinated by a particular culture, you have a hope of succeeding. Wait till you acquire such a fascination, then learn.
My guess is that they don't know as accurately as they need the weight of a silicon-28 atom, and/or they don't know exactly how compactly they are packed in a typical sphere of silicon. Remember, its no use knowing how many silicon atoms are in a kilogram unless it is feasible to construct reference spheres for use in real life, and this is the test they are embarking on.
OS-X upgrades are perceived to be much more painless than Windows upgrades. For one thing, less changes in one upgrade. For another, since they control the hardware better, there are fewer device surprises. And there was never such a bloat discrepency between 2 releases as there is between XP and Vista.
Slashdot Mirror
Rail requires massive capital investment, which is the one thing that the US auto industry conspicuously lacks. Maybe *somebody* ought to invest in rail, but it's hard to see what GM et al can bring to that table.
Essentially, every debt has a risk. Risk determines interest rate. 2 week commercial paper for Ford has a different risk to 2 year commercial paper for Ford (which is different again to GM etc etc). You might have confidence Ford can pay up in 2 weeks, but you're not sure if the economy will tank in 2 years.
Now if Ford needs money for a certain period of time, whether to finance some car leases that are expiring in a month, or to finance some new ones that expire in 2 years, they've got to go to the market who will evaluate all the details of the risk and make you pay the appropriate rate.
The complexity of the system is people's attempt to defray risk. The problem is, the risk of the entire system became too aggressive, so all this defrayment of risk meant that nobody had more risk than anyone else, but everyone had too much.
It seems to me if you bought half a dozen 500GB drives, then in 10 years time at least one (probably most) of them will still work. Get different brands, different sizes to guard against particular problems. Maybe even do the 4GB Flash thing as well, and get some good quality DVDs too. I think the key here is not to put all your eggs in one basket. This is an open research question, and we may be interested how your solutions go in 10 years time.
Oh, if you want to be *really* sure, do the Mormon gold plates thing.
I think average programmers can understand virtual functions, templates and multiple inheritance, but perhaps not the way C++ implements it. C++ makes powerful concepts complicated, because it tries too hard to be close to the metal. Try Eiffel as a language that has these things in a more understandable way.
"are you going to let the CPU designers push you into a programming paradigm you are not effective in?"
No we shouldn't. However, functional programming IS a very effective method, or at least it often is.
This didn't end well last time with most of the G5 Power Macs ending up leaking their coolant and destroying their insides.
Maybe this copper stealing problem is resolving itself then.
You're talking nonsense. The same Chinese companies that make Apple computers also make Acers, HPs etc etc. When Apple gets more share, HP calls China and says "make 3 million less laptops". Then Apple calls the same people and says "make 3 million more laptops".
1) If they are still in the new book channel, then that's a totally different scenario. When the channel is cleared there may well be another print run. I suppose ethically, they should be given a fair period of time to choose to make another print run.
If some guy in Texas picked up the last few copies, and wants to on-sell them, how much effort am I supposed to expend to locate that seller? Am I supposed to spend 5 years trawling the world for the last copies? I don't think so. A few last copies in the channel is the risk for those who want to take it.
3) So you should have a reasonable time, maybe a year or two since the main channel is cleared, to make the second run. If you don't bother, and it diminishes future runs, I think tough luck. The world can't sit on tenterhooks waiting to see what you will do.
A good sentiment, but if its out of print, its likely obscure enough you don't have any friends who want it.
1) Copyright laws are not there to protect the "book market" as some kind of ephemeral whole. They are to protect creators of works.
2) Copyright laws are not there to protect used book sellers.
3) True, but the ultimate aim of copyright is to encourage production and distribution of creative works. When the owner lets them go out of print they are abusing the system.
I can see the logic, but I don't want to clog my limited house up with more dead trees. So I could buy the book and burn it, but it's against my prinicples to be wasteful like that.
If the author isn't going to make $$$ anyway, why not at least save the environment?
I'm pretty sure the contracts would have been vague enough that there are no refunds. Something along the lines of "we indemnify you against all IP issues that may or may not exist".
Ironically, Linux used to be a stupid hobby for a Finnish boy, but not to be taken seriously. Now Linux is mainstream, and AIX is too marginal to be a real platform any more. Same for Irix and HP-UX, SCO, Unixware and a whole of other Nixes. Solaris seems to be moving in that direction too.
1) Case sensitivity is optional. Besides which, I'd be strugging to think of much UNIX stuff that requires case sensitivity.
2) I've used UNIX for a decade and a half on various platforms and flavours and never had cause to use dump or restore.
3) X11 while closely associated with the history of UNIX, is not a fundamental part of UNIX.
"You get the app, with no window"
Right, because an app != a window. What if you alt-tabbed to Safari so you could open a NEW window? It would be damned annoying to have some other window pop up.
"On some Apple made apps closing the main windows does not close the app, on others (still made by apple) it does."
Right, and there is a good reason for which one is which. Your point is?
"I Spend more time in my day fighting the mac interface than I do getting productive work done."
What a lot of nonsense.
"If you install FileMaker server on OSX Server it will overwrite your php.ini file with it's own idea of the settings you need."
And that's Apple's fault I suppose?
Are you sure you can't use Hibernate? It has a lot of hooks. At least tell me you've read the book by the Hibernate author. I think you might regret bailing on it. Harder requirements need better tools to get the job done, not crappier tools like JDBC.
Let's say for the sake of argument that some advanced alien space travelling race created life on earth and guided its advancement over time through genetic engineering.
There's no reason in principle why this fact, if it was a fact, could not be subjected to scientific investigation.
If we substitute divine being for alien being, nothing changes in principle.
Whether you think actual real life creationists have any scientific credibility is one thing. But to a-priori claim that creationism can't be science, is itself unscientific.
I would think that if Josh took the copy knowing full well what it was, there would be an implied authorization. Not to mention that in the P2P case, it is the downloader who initiates the copying and distribution cycle.
It hasn't been "rewritten" over and over. Scholars pretty much know what the original said, give or take the odd word here or there. That's because there are abundant manuscripts and ancient versions. There isn't much controversial here, no matter what your religious beliefs. Even the most divergent of manuscripts are still the same bible, and a typical man in the pew probably wouldn't notice which manuscript it was translated from.
If you attempt to learn a language for the sake of your computer career you will almost certainly fail. But if you learn because you are fascinated by a particular culture, you have a hope of succeeding. Wait till you acquire such a fascination, then learn.
My guess is that they don't know as accurately as they need the weight of a silicon-28 atom, and/or they don't know exactly how compactly they are packed in a typical sphere of silicon. Remember, its no use knowing how many silicon atoms are in a kilogram unless it is feasible to construct reference spheres for use in real life, and this is the test they are embarking on.
Can someone help a foreigner to understand how the US has circumvented their constitution?
OS-X upgrades are perceived to be much more painless than Windows upgrades. For one thing, less changes in one upgrade. For another, since they control the hardware better, there are fewer device surprises. And there was never such a bloat discrepency between 2 releases as there is between XP and Vista.
I just accessed the slashdot server without written authorization. Sue me.