panIP doesn't need success in courts. It's cheaper for most of the small businesses that are being targeted to simply pay the $5000 (in the chocolate company's case) to panIP than to wage a court battle. Maybe a few companies defend themselves in the lawsuit, but panIP can afford a couple battles as long as most give in and pay the money.
That these sort of strategies work nicely is clear demonstration that the US legal system doesn't protect everyone equally, but that the great deal of beauracracy involved works to the advantage of the wealthy.
Agreed. The plot in Dune was almost secondary to Frank Herbert's quality writing. The new authors miss the point entirely, focusing merely on plot. Normally, I wouldn't expect an author to attempt to match voice and style used in another author's work, but it was such an integral part of Herbert's Dune series that the simplistic style of the new books make it difficult to appreciate their efforts.
However, I disagree that there is any shortage of good science fiction. There's a lot of crappy science fiction (definitely!) but there's a lot of crappy writing in every genre. You still won't be able to read all the good science fiction out there in your lifetime. Vonnegut, Orwell, Wells, Ellison, Marquez, Dick, Bradbury, Tiptree, Blish, Kornbluth, Leinster... Just to start.
The point isn't whether YOU think a game is objectionable or not. You saying that BMX:XXX is ojbectionable is as irrelevant as a senator saying GTA is objectionable. Everyone has their own definitions on what is objectionable. The problem is when you try to impose your own definitions on other people.
BMX:XXX is a fantasy game for people that like boobs and and BMX. Who are you to say that's got any less right to exist than a game involving cars and guns?
Trying to prefect a visually simple interface doesn't necessarily mean you don't like window managers or lots of features. For the sort of things I do, clicky clicking all over the screen is slow and annoying, so i use many great window manager features (I use fvwm2) to help me work the way I want. It may look like a console screen, but it's highly tweaked.
Everybody got used to clicking on the little monkey in the top right corner of the screen to make your window bigger, but I think my alt+insert works faster.
You must also consider how proposals were evaluated for that contract. That particular evaluation method may have weighted cost to insignificance, instead focusing on technical merit. I don't know what company you're talking about, but to many, the difference of a few tens of thousands of dollars is trivial.
Also, if you were a small company competing against larger, it's possible that the reason you bid lower is because you're "leaner and meaner" (that is, less administrative and fringe costs associated with your per hour rate). To many evaluating companies "lean and mean" is a risk because it might mean you're not established and may go under before you finish your project (or during the maintenance phase).
odd, i thought the/. reaction would be "censorship!, outrage!". Isn't it troubling that an organization would block traffic from an entire nation because of some abusers? I would find it unfortunate if a foriegn provider wouldn't let me email their nation's citizens because they were sick of American spam.
Don't listen to the guys saying engineering problems are best solved with procedural programming. That's a ludicrous generality.
Both methods (and basically all programming paradigms) can be used to solve your problem. Which you choose depends on factors other than just "which will work". Readability, reuse, maintainability, performance, and ease of design are some of the issues you'll have to weigh do decide whether to use OO or procedural. In my opinion, OO programming beats procedural in all these matters except performance (but C++ ain't too bad, right?).
My company does a great deal of mission-critical engineering software development (satellite command and control, for example), and we approach every large project with OO design and implementation. We find it insturmental in managing complex systems.
If you ever have to show your code to someone else, they'll thank you for having partitioned your project into smaller entities each with their own responsibilites and personalities. This modeling concept is much easier to follow than procedural's interweaving threads of execution.
Slashdot Mirror
panIP doesn't need success in courts. It's cheaper for most of the small businesses that are being targeted to simply pay the $5000 (in the chocolate company's case) to panIP than to wage a court battle. Maybe a few companies defend themselves in the lawsuit, but panIP can afford a couple battles as long as most give in and pay the money.
That these sort of strategies work nicely is clear demonstration that the US legal system doesn't protect everyone equally, but that the great deal of beauracracy involved works to the advantage of the wealthy.
Agreed. The plot in Dune was almost secondary to Frank Herbert's quality writing. The new authors miss the point entirely, focusing merely on plot. Normally, I wouldn't expect an author to attempt to match voice and style used in another author's work, but it was such an integral part of Herbert's Dune series that the simplistic style of the new books make it difficult to appreciate their efforts.
However, I disagree that there is any shortage of good science fiction. There's a lot of crappy science fiction (definitely!) but there's a lot of crappy writing in every genre. You still won't be able to read all the good science fiction out there in your lifetime. Vonnegut, Orwell, Wells, Ellison, Marquez, Dick, Bradbury, Tiptree, Blish, Kornbluth, Leinster... Just to start.
Cecil Adams of the Straight Dope researched the topic of Vatican porn. His findings are here
The point isn't whether YOU think a game is objectionable or not. You saying that BMX:XXX is ojbectionable is as irrelevant as a senator saying GTA is objectionable. Everyone has their own definitions on what is objectionable. The problem is when you try to impose your own definitions on other people.
BMX:XXX is a fantasy game for people that like boobs and and BMX. Who are you to say that's got any less right to exist than a game involving cars and guns?
Trying to prefect a visually simple interface doesn't necessarily mean you don't like window managers or lots of features. For the sort of things I do, clicky clicking all over the screen is slow and annoying, so i use many great window manager features (I use fvwm2) to help me work the way I want. It may look like a console screen, but it's highly tweaked.
Everybody got used to clicking on the little monkey in the top right corner of the screen to make your window bigger, but I think my alt+insert works faster.
You must also consider how proposals were evaluated for that contract. That particular evaluation method may have weighted cost to insignificance, instead focusing on technical merit. I don't know what company you're talking about, but to many, the difference of a few tens of thousands of dollars is trivial. Also, if you were a small company competing against larger, it's possible that the reason you bid lower is because you're "leaner and meaner" (that is, less administrative and fringe costs associated with your per hour rate). To many evaluating companies "lean and mean" is a risk because it might mean you're not established and may go under before you finish your project (or during the maintenance phase).
odd, i thought the /. reaction would be "censorship!, outrage!". Isn't it troubling that an organization would block traffic from an entire nation because of some abusers? I would find it unfortunate if a foriegn provider wouldn't let me email their nation's citizens because they were sick of American spam.
Don't listen to the guys saying engineering problems are best solved with procedural programming. That's a ludicrous generality.
Both methods (and basically all programming paradigms) can be used to solve your problem. Which you choose depends on factors other than just "which will work". Readability, reuse, maintainability, performance, and ease of design are some of the issues you'll have to weigh do decide whether to use OO or procedural. In my opinion, OO programming beats procedural in all these matters except performance (but C++ ain't too bad, right?).
My company does a great deal of mission-critical engineering software development (satellite command and control, for example), and we approach every large project with OO design and implementation. We find it insturmental in managing complex systems.
If you ever have to show your code to someone else, they'll thank you for having partitioned your project into smaller entities each with their own responsibilites and personalities. This modeling concept is much easier to follow than procedural's interweaving threads of execution.