What you need to think about is how it can be used or abused.
A trusted p2p network, where the RIAA can't insert bogus files, or modify a p2p client to insert such files. Because the identity of the bogus client can be securely identified down to the motherboard.:)
Multiplayer gaming with no problems from cheats on trusted clients. Modify your client and it gets banned. The problem will be that the only trusted platform will be a Longhorn one.:/
A bank web site that only allows online banking from "trusted" platforms such as IE7 on Longhorn to prevent fraud.:(
I'm thinking that those OS's are also on the MS sh*t list.
MS want mo'money. If they could find a way to make all those pesky long-lived, non-activated computers become obsolete, BillG would do a happy dance.
I'm not saying he can actually do it. I'm saying he's thinking of HOW to do it. And if he gets enough market penetration with Trusted computing, he will at least try.
I don't remember who I asked, but I was told that the receipt is marked so that you can't drop off your items in your car, walk back into the store, and pick up more of the same items.
"There are some new modern-day sort of communists who want to get rid of the incentive for musicians and moviemakers and software makers under various guises. They don't think that those incentives should exist." -- Bill Gates
Yes, he's lumping them altogether improperly, but thats how he sees it. If you give it away, Music, movies, or Software, then your not working for incentive and are a communist.
No... what is being said that if you make more noise about Microsoft doing this than any other company that does this exact thing, then you are a hypocrit.
Whether we like it or not, Microsoft is a big part of everybodys life, especially slashdotters. When it does something nasty, or something nice, it will naturally be more in the lime light than say Buonjorno.
This is not being hypocritical, it's being human.
Hypocritical would be saying that its bad for Microsoft to do it, but not bad for Apple to do it. The amount of attention given doesn't matter.
Until recently, a typical Avida experiment would end up with a single dominant organism. The Avida researchers suspected that was the result of providing an endless supply of food-in this case, numbers. Perhaps, they reasoned, if they put their digital organisms on a diet, they might evolve into different forms-just as it happens in nature. ... The Avida team subsequently flooded some digital worlds with numbers and limited others to a scant supply, and the same pattern of diversity found in global ecosystems emerged. When the number supply was low, only one type of organism could survive. At intermediate levels, three or four different types emerged and coexisted. Each type evolved into a specialist at one or a few kinds of operations. But when the number supply got too abundant, diversity dropped to a single species again. ... In the original experiment, the organisms evolved the equals routine in 23 out of 50 trials. But when the experiment was run with a limited supply of numbers, all the trials produced organisms that could carry out the equals routine. What's more, they needed only a fifth of the time to do it.
Does evolution require more than just mutations that affect reproductive success?
This is a real life experiment mentioned in the FA.
He began with a single bacterium-Escherichia coli-and used its offspring to found 12 separate colonies of bacteria that he nurtured on a meager diet of glucose, which creates a strong incentive for the evolution of new ways to survive. Over the past 17 years, the colonies have passed through 35,000 generations. In the process, they've become one of the clearest demonstrations that natural selection is real. All 12 colonies have evolved to the point at which the bacteria can replicate almost twice as fast as their ancestors. At the same time, the bacterial cells have gotten twice as big. Surprisingly, these changes didn't unfold in a smooth, linear process. Instead, each colony evolved in sudden jerks, followed by hundreds of generations of little change, followed by more jerks.
Either God has big plans for these bacteria or evolution just happens.
"You don't have to dislike it...but if the 50 year old grey haired executive doesn't like it...then that's likely to hold a little more weight."
If a 50 yr old grey haired executive is making IT decisions based on a LOGO, then that executive is most likely going to pick MS Windows ME as the superior OS. Changing the logo won't accomplish anything.
People who pick BSD do so based on merits, not logos.
Because every time I'm told that an application is needed, and that it absolutely HAS to be Photoshop because of feature [x]; I dig for 2 minutes and find that its a Do nothing executive, whose just playing around trying to make a wallpaper of her puppy, with a frigin textbubble saying "I wuv you". Then yeah, I would give them Gimp instead of Photoshop.
In my office we have, one guy, (1, uno, ein) that needs Photoshop. And yes, we got it for him. But once people see him using it, they all started chiming in about they 'needed' it.
Same story with MS Office. "I need it!", they say. What for I ask. "Important bussiness related stuff", they reply. 5 minutes later that Bussiness-Stuff turns out to be a phone extension list. MS Office for This? Bah!!
Don't get me wrong. I agree with you. "the very professionals that have to use the software for a living" should use the best tool for the Job. If that Job requires an MS product or Top end niche software, so be it.
But the problem is the majority of these requests for such software come from people, who would be better served using Notepad, Calc and Paint rather than MS Word, MS Excel and Photoshop.
For these people, which again, I find to be the majority, OO, Gimp and the like are more than adequate.
And rare MS-only/Adobe-Photoshop feature X, is generaly brought up as an excuse rather then as a need.
Hinduism is a conglomeration of dozens of local religions and customs along with some Buddist philosophy.
Hinduism is one of the oldest religions, with origins going back to 2500BC or more. Just because it's not xenophobic and tightly controlled like judaism is not a reason to dismiss it so lightly.
Hindu culture exists and it has identity. It has existed for nearly 5000 years. To dismiss it as you do does not paint you in a very flattering light.
One of the obscure rules that always gave me a laugh was the one that women are not allowed to look into mirrors during sabath.
The idea was that no work could be done during the lords day, and any women looking into a mirror might be tempted to pretty herself up (ie. work), clearly in violation of the lords commandment.
On the other hand, Greeks were open about sex, and even about homosexuality, and that led to a great civilisation, simply because people were open-minded and not constrained by laws.
Being open-minded about ideas, heavy into science, mathematics, and philosophy led to a great civilization. Not caring about sexual preferences is merely a side effect of being open-minded.
Ticks have a genetic basis for homosexuality. At least I think it was ticks..
They reproduce in a wierd way. The males "penis" is nothing more than a spike that pierces the cuticle of the female. The female has a soft spot in the cuticle for such mating. The male then deposits its sperm directly into the females blood where they migrate towards the females ovaries and fertilze the eggs that are there.
This technique of sperm migrating towards reproductive organs has allowed male ticks to "rape" other male ticks. With a larger, stronger "spike" the gay ticks pierce the male ticks and the rapists gametes migrate towards the male victims own testicles, where they stay until he subsequently mates. The sperm which the victim deposits into a female tick is now a mixture of his own and that of the gay ticks. So the gay tick can have offspring by raping males.
The raping ticks themselves can get raped. So a mating session could involve a female mounted by a male, mounted by male, mounted by yet another male, etc.
A female tick can be picky, so a gay tick doesn't need to court her, it just waits till a straight tick is accepted and mounts her. Once mounted, the straight tick is easy prey for the the gay ones since it's now immobile.
Only the gay ticks have superior schlongs. The straight ones don't need them since females have that soft spot, so there was no evoulutionary pressure to get bigger ones. So basically you have three distinct populations. Female, Straight Male, and Gay Male. If I remember right there are no bisexual ones.
I don't remember where I read this, but I do remember that it was a book and not a web site.
It's too much like Micheal Jackson visiting a childrens hospital after being charged as a pedophile.
Yeah it's nice, buts its a PR stunt to improve his image none the less. How many donations to the needy did MS do when it was the darling of the press and loved by all as a shining example of American capitalism?
The more negative the image, the more he donates. It's standard operating procedure for any large company.
they produce a sharp, loud buzz that rises in pitch. The sound lasts a good fraction of a second and climbs somewhere into what sounds like the 200-500 Hz range.
I also don't believe its a simple bounce. If that were so then it should work with any magnets with a a strong surface. I've never heard of this.
Someone pointed out that liquidmetal demos the same rising pitch behaviour. They do this by having an inredibly efficient 99% bounce. But singing magnets have been around for a while before that.
I think the shape allows the magnets to convert their kenetic energy into a rolling motion and back to kenetic without needing to to do a real bounce and avoid elasticity losses.
Think of Tony Hawks doing a half pipe. Vertical to horizontal back to vertical. The magnets with their weird shape collide slightly off center, then pulled by the magnetic fields convert a portion of their energy to the rolling that occurs as they get into a more parallel position and then inertia carries them beyond equilibrium where the kenetic energy throws them apart again. Like a rocking chair but with enough energy to seperate the surfaces. As long as the rolling resistance is low it should be pretty efficient.
Normally shapped magnets don't exibit the same behaviour since their surfaces collide and depend entirely on their modulus of elasticity to rebound them.
I not sure but I also think that the rolling action reduces peek force at contact so what bounce there is can be more efficient.
Also, the US ignored it's own patents when Edison was around. Edison had patents on the camera which is why Hollywood is on the west coast: they didn't want to pay any patent royalties so they just avoided his collectors.
Whoa! So the industry the MPAA represents owes its very existence to a bunch of IP Pirates?!!
Forgive me, I always screw up the definition.. Is this Ironic?
there's no way they can afford to put 4 of them in a sub-$500 game console.
I'm thinking there's no way they can afford not to.
MS wants to take out sony as the leader in the game market. Their tactic is to take cheap PC hardware, snap up hot games and make them exclusive by buying out the game companies. Throw a lot of advertising on it and vio'la. Anyone can see the writing on the wall.
Sony has to come out with something that will smoke whatever the XBox2 is going to be. Not just your regular smoke, but the rip of its head and crap down its throat kind. Massive parallelism is probably the cheapest way to do it and the added bonus is that MS can't duplicate the tactic with their cheap x86 hardware.
Make an Xbox2 look like a toy in comparison to the PS3 and the fight will be over (at least for a while).
With MS as a competitor you either crush or be crushed.
From the Article:
'Data processing system using substantially unique identifiers to identify data items, whereby identical data items have the same identifiers,'
From the grandparent:
With these software patents, I'm prohibited from making anything that accomplishes X, even if I have a novel method, because company Y has a patent on software that does that.
What is getting under everyones skin is OVER BROAD patents.
Read the grandparent AGAIN.
Let me show you why your response doesn't show you understand his point.
From the grandparent (with a hint):
With these software patents, I'm prohibited from making anything that accomplishes (compression), even if I have a novel method, because company Y has a patent on software that does that.
OVERBROAD patents are not patents on Particular algorithms (a 10x better compression). Rather, they are patents on IDEAS (a unique number that identifies an object).
Slashdot Mirror
What you need to think about is how it can be used or abused.
A trusted p2p network, where the RIAA can't insert bogus files, or modify a p2p client to insert such files. Because the identity of the bogus client can be securely identified down to the motherboard. :)
Multiplayer gaming with no problems from cheats on trusted clients. Modify your client and it gets banned. The problem will be that the only trusted platform will be a Longhorn one. :/
A bank web site that only allows online banking from "trusted" platforms such as IE7 on Longhorn to prevent fraud. :(
It's like anything, good and bad.
MS want mo'money. If they could find a way to make all those pesky long-lived, non-activated computers become obsolete, BillG would do a happy dance.
I'm not saying he can actually do it. I'm saying he's thinking of HOW to do it. And if he gets enough market penetration with Trusted computing, he will at least try.
He would be an idiot not too, and he's no idiot.
I don't remember who I asked, but I was told that the receipt is marked so that you can't drop off your items in your car, walk back into the store, and pick up more of the same items.
I wish I could give you my karma.
Or try this: coral link
Speaking of which, WTF is up with picture number 2!!!
I thinking that must be the picture they showed him to get a quick confession.
"There are some new modern-day sort of communists who want to get rid of the incentive for musicians and moviemakers and software makers under various guises. They don't think that those incentives should exist." -- Bill Gates
Yes, he's lumping them altogether improperly, but thats how he sees it. If you give it away, Music, movies, or Software, then your not working for incentive and are a communist.
Whether we like it or not, Microsoft is a big part of everybodys life, especially slashdotters. When it does something nasty, or something nice, it will naturally be more in the lime light than say Buonjorno.
This is not being hypocritical, it's being human.
Hypocritical would be saying that its bad for Microsoft to do it, but not bad for Apple to do it. The amount of attention given doesn't matter.
Until recently, a typical Avida experiment would end up with a single dominant organism. The Avida researchers suspected that was the result of providing an endless supply of food-in this case, numbers. Perhaps, they reasoned, if they put their digital organisms on a diet, they might evolve into different forms-just as it happens in nature.
...
The Avida team subsequently flooded some digital worlds with numbers and limited others to a scant supply, and the same pattern of diversity found in global ecosystems emerged. When the number supply was low, only one type of organism could survive. At intermediate levels, three or four different types emerged and coexisted. Each type evolved into a specialist at one or a few kinds of operations. But when the number supply got too abundant, diversity dropped to a single species again.
...
In the original experiment, the organisms evolved the equals routine in 23 out of 50 trials. But when the experiment was run with a limited supply of numbers, all the trials produced organisms that could carry out the equals routine. What's more, they needed only a fifth of the time to do it.
Looks like evolution needs a challenge to thrive.
This is a real life experiment mentioned in the FA.
He began with a single bacterium-Escherichia coli-and used its offspring to found 12 separate colonies of bacteria that he nurtured on a meager diet of glucose, which creates a strong incentive for the evolution of new ways to survive. Over the past 17 years, the colonies have passed through 35,000 generations. In the process, they've become one of the clearest demonstrations that natural selection is real. All 12 colonies have evolved to the point at which the bacteria can replicate almost twice as fast as their ancestors. At the same time, the bacterial cells have gotten twice as big. Surprisingly, these changes didn't unfold in a smooth, linear process. Instead, each colony evolved in sudden jerks, followed by hundreds of generations of little change, followed by more jerks.
Either God has big plans for these bacteria or evolution just happens.
BTW, I think this is called "snap" evolution.
If a 50 yr old grey haired executive is making IT decisions based on a LOGO, then that executive is most likely going to pick MS Windows ME as the superior OS. Changing the logo won't accomplish anything.
People who pick BSD do so based on merits, not logos.
I've always hated the blue dudes that intel shoves on TV. To me they are unprofessional. Hasn't seemed to hurt their "professional" image any.
Besides, if it bothers you so much, pay a techie $10 on rent-a-coder.com to remove it for you.
btw, please don't say "Next."
Your giving me flash backs to The Rocky Horror Picture Show.
In my office we have, one guy, (1, uno, ein) that needs Photoshop. And yes, we got it for him. But once people see him using it, they all started chiming in about they 'needed' it.
Same story with MS Office. "I need it!", they say. What for I ask. "Important bussiness related stuff", they reply. 5 minutes later that Bussiness-Stuff turns out to be a phone extension list. MS Office for This? Bah!!
Don't get me wrong. I agree with you. "the very professionals that have to use the software for a living" should use the best tool for the Job. If that Job requires an MS product or Top end niche software, so be it.
But the problem is the majority of these requests for such software come from people, who would be better served using Notepad, Calc and Paint rather than MS Word, MS Excel and Photoshop.
For these people, which again, I find to be the majority, OO, Gimp and the like are more than adequate. And rare MS-only/Adobe-Photoshop feature X, is generaly brought up as an excuse rather then as a need.
Hinduism is one of the oldest religions, with origins going back to 2500BC or more. Just because it's not xenophobic and tightly controlled like judaism is not a reason to dismiss it so lightly.
Hindu culture exists and it has identity. It has existed for nearly 5000 years. To dismiss it as you do does not paint you in a very flattering light.
The idea was that no work could be done during the lords day, and any women looking into a mirror might be tempted to pretty herself up (ie. work), clearly in violation of the lords commandment.
Being open-minded about ideas, heavy into science, mathematics, and philosophy led to a great civilization. Not caring about sexual preferences is merely a side effect of being open-minded.
They reproduce in a wierd way. The males "penis" is nothing more than a spike that pierces the cuticle of the female. The female has a soft spot in the cuticle for such mating. The male then deposits its sperm directly into the females blood where they migrate towards the females ovaries and fertilze the eggs that are there.
This technique of sperm migrating towards reproductive organs has allowed male ticks to "rape" other male ticks. With a larger, stronger "spike" the gay ticks pierce the male ticks and the rapists gametes migrate towards the male victims own testicles, where they stay until he subsequently mates. The sperm which the victim deposits into a female tick is now a mixture of his own and that of the gay ticks. So the gay tick can have offspring by raping males.
The raping ticks themselves can get raped. So a mating session could involve a female mounted by a male, mounted by male, mounted by yet another male, etc.
A female tick can be picky, so a gay tick doesn't need to court her, it just waits till a straight tick is accepted and mounts her. Once mounted, the straight tick is easy prey for the the gay ones since it's now immobile.
Only the gay ticks have superior schlongs. The straight ones don't need them since females have that soft spot, so there was no evoulutionary pressure to get bigger ones. So basically you have three distinct populations. Female, Straight Male, and Gay Male. If I remember right there are no bisexual ones.
I don't remember where I read this, but I do remember that it was a book and not a web site.
You are allowed to tell someone how to make a bomb. You just cant do it for them. Is this not the same thing?
I work at a broker dealer where we have a set of machines that sit on two different ISPs, and this is the technique we use in case one line goes down.
Yeah it's nice, buts its a PR stunt to improve his image none the less. How many donations to the needy did MS do when it was the darling of the press and loved by all as a shining example of American capitalism?
The more negative the image, the more he donates. It's standard operating procedure for any large company.
Check for yourself US vs MS timeline, MS vs Bad PR
I am glad he did it. But it does not change my opinion of him, because I know WHY he did it.
they produce a sharp, loud buzz that rises in pitch. The sound lasts a good fraction of a second and climbs somewhere into what sounds like the 200-500 Hz range.
I also don't believe its a simple bounce. If that were so then it should work with any magnets with a a strong surface. I've never heard of this.
Someone pointed out that liquidmetal demos the same rising pitch behaviour. They do this by having an inredibly efficient 99% bounce. But singing magnets have been around for a while before that.
I think the shape allows the magnets to convert their kenetic energy into a rolling motion and back to kenetic without needing to to do a real bounce and avoid elasticity losses.
Think of Tony Hawks doing a half pipe. Vertical to horizontal back to vertical. The magnets with their weird shape collide slightly off center, then pulled by the magnetic fields convert a portion of their energy to the rolling that occurs as they get into a more parallel position and then inertia carries them beyond equilibrium where the kenetic energy throws them apart again. Like a rocking chair but with enough energy to seperate the surfaces. As long as the rolling resistance is low it should be pretty efficient.
Normally shapped magnets don't exibit the same behaviour since their surfaces collide and depend entirely on their modulus of elasticity to rebound them.
I not sure but I also think that the rolling action reduces peek force at contact so what bounce there is can be more efficient.
At least thats my guess..
Whoa! So the industry the MPAA represents owes its very existence to a bunch of IP Pirates?!!
Forgive me, I always screw up the definition.. Is this Ironic?
I just installed it and it was there.
Found with updated spybot.
I'm thinking there's no way they can afford not to.
MS wants to take out sony as the leader in the game market. Their tactic is to take cheap PC hardware, snap up hot games and make them exclusive by buying out the game companies. Throw a lot of advertising on it and vio'la. Anyone can see the writing on the wall.
Sony has to come out with something that will smoke whatever the XBox2 is going to be. Not just your regular smoke, but the rip of its head and crap down its throat kind. Massive parallelism is probably the cheapest way to do it and the added bonus is that MS can't duplicate the tactic with their cheap x86 hardware.
Make an Xbox2 look like a toy in comparison to the PS3 and the fight will be over (at least for a while).
With MS as a competitor you either crush or be crushed.
From the Article: 'Data processing system using substantially unique identifiers to identify data items, whereby identical data items have the same identifiers,'
From the grandparent: With these software patents, I'm prohibited from making anything that accomplishes X, even if I have a novel method, because company Y has a patent on software that does that.
What is getting under everyones skin is OVER BROAD patents.
Read the grandparent AGAIN.
Let me show you why your response doesn't show you understand his point.
From the grandparent (with a hint): With these software patents, I'm prohibited from making anything that accomplishes (compression), even if I have a novel method, because company Y has a patent on software that does that.
OVERBROAD patents are not patents on Particular algorithms (a 10x better compression). Rather, they are patents on IDEAS (a unique number that identifies an object).
post 11360699 also tried to explain this to you.
This cant be coincidence..