How about murderers, are they evil? Or, did they just naturally evolve to try to survive and to kill other human beings?
It is not the individual cancer cell's fault that it has evolved into such. It has been triggered to behave that way or perhaps it was "born" by cellular division as such in the first place. However, the collection of this cells and their doing is evil it that it can kill you.
Cancer *is* evil, and it fits the definition of "evil" very well: "causing harm", "marked by misfortune", "causing discomfort or repulsion", etc. (see webster.com)
Since you don't want to write such code inadvertently, C# requires you to use the unsafe keyword on your class or method whenever you write code that deals with pointers. When you use the unsafe keyword, the resulting IL is marked as unsafe and can only run in a fully trusted environment (usually, security policy only trusts local assemblies). In the current version of the runtime, unsafe is defined at an assembly level, so having any unsafe code in assembly makes the entire assembly unsafe.
Well, in case writing unsafe code becomes a frequent practice among C# programmers, this means that in order to run most of the code, you need to set the security policy to trust most of the C# code. Now, I don't know much about C# and CLR, but I assume the when your code uses libraries with unsafe code, then your code ALSO becomes unsafe. Just imagine that one very common library to use unsafe code; then the unsafe code itself will spread like a virus. And this doesn't look good.
I don't doubt that not many people will be eager to use this service. But looking at what's going on, it may be an indication that a lot of services offered on the internet, for which we are used to seeing them as free, will no longer be such. Google, for example, is trying to make money in several different ways -- selling link placement, licensing searches to Yahoo, licensing searches to any web site. If this does not bring in enough money for them, the only logical place to draw cach from would be the consumers (people that search; advertizing exposure is not good enough). The well established internet companies (such as Yahoo, Google) want to start making (more significant) profit.
If Yahoo, Google or others don't start making more significant profits, they will remain relatively small companies, and may be swallowed by some large entity, such as MS, AOL. And perhaps they don't want that. I know, I don't want that.
I am affraid that Yahoo may be setting a precedent that may be followed by many others, including Google.
Slashdot Mirror
Perhaps they are banking on the fact that the production price will drop below $100 in a year or so. First laptops will not ship until January 2007.
How about murderers, are they evil? Or, did they just naturally evolve to try to survive and to kill other human beings?
It is not the individual cancer cell's fault that it has evolved into such. It has been triggered to behave that way or perhaps it was "born" by cellular division as such in the first place. However, the collection of this cells and their doing is evil it that it can kill you.
Cancer *is* evil, and it fits the definition of "evil" very well: "causing harm", "marked by misfortune", "causing discomfort or repulsion", etc. (see webster.com)
Since you don't want to write such code inadvertently, C# requires you to use the unsafe keyword on your class or method whenever you write code that deals with pointers. When you use the unsafe keyword, the resulting IL is marked as unsafe and can only run in a fully trusted environment (usually, security policy only trusts local assemblies). In the current version of the runtime, unsafe is defined at an assembly level, so having any unsafe code in assembly makes the entire assembly unsafe.
Well, in case writing unsafe code becomes a frequent practice among C# programmers, this means that in order to run most of the code, you need to set the security policy to trust most of the C# code. Now, I don't know much about C# and CLR, but I assume the when your code uses libraries with unsafe code, then your code ALSO becomes unsafe. Just imagine that one very common library to use unsafe code; then the unsafe code itself will spread like a virus. And this doesn't look good.
I don't doubt that not many people will be eager to use this service. But looking at what's going on, it may be an indication that a lot of services offered on the internet, for which we are used to seeing them as free, will no longer be such. Google, for example, is trying to make money in several different ways -- selling link placement, licensing searches to Yahoo, licensing searches to any web site. If this does not bring in enough money for them, the only logical place to draw cach from would be the consumers (people that search; advertizing exposure is not good enough). The well established internet companies (such as Yahoo, Google) want to start making (more significant) profit.
If Yahoo, Google or others don't start making more significant profits, they will remain relatively small companies, and may be swallowed by some large entity, such as MS, AOL. And perhaps they don't want that. I know, I don't want that.
I am affraid that Yahoo may be setting a precedent that may be followed by many others, including Google.