Yes. At least that's the way human psychology works.
We generally assume (it's a survival thing) that nobody acts out of pure altruism.
In the case of the $99.95, the guy is apparently being upfront about his motivations (what he gains from this exchange).
Okay, he might run off and you'll be out $99.95, but he isn't showing any immediate signs of having something more insidious in mind.
The other guy giving stuff away for free, on the other hand, seems to be hiding his true motivations (what he stands to gain) from you.
"What?" "Nothing." "Really?" "You want nothing in exchange?" "I want nothing in exchange." "...REALLY?" "Yes!" "Are you sure...?" "YES!" "Uh... yeah. I... have to go now..."
We instinctively interpret evasiveness about motivations as a danger signal. We should. It's an important survival mechanism.
If you ever plan on giving away something for free, be darn sure you're either doing this in a subculture where it is normal (and thus there is a reasonable expectation of eventual reciprocation from the group -- e.g. open source circles), or be VERY clear about your motivations up front.
Apparently you've never used AOL. The normal means for web browsing (and this is all most AOL users use) is the mshtml control (IE) embedded in the AOL client window.
The change in AOL 7 will be that Gecko (Mozilla) is embedded there rather than IE.
No clicking on 'e' or (admittedly) stupid-looking lizards involved.
Now, it IS true that AOL users aren't all going to magically upgrade to AOL 7 once it comes out.
It doesn't really matter until you meet the other person again anyway.
The acceleration along the path you each take determines who, if anyone, is ahead.
If your trips were mirror images of each other, then on the outgoing journey (accelerating away) you'd each see the other's clock slow down.
On the way back (accelerating towards one another), you'd each see the other's clocks speed up again until they were back in synch when you met.
If the trips were not completely symmetric, then there will be a discrepancy... but once you're both in the same reference frame again things will have settled out so that you agree on the "direction" of the discrepancy.
You'd still need to do the simulation at the micro-level. The granularity of the simulation (or reality) has a big effect on the behavior of these kinds of systems.
Actually even on macro scales some quantum effects (e.g. quantum gravity) have observable results. For example, orbits decay faster than they otherwise might because of energy loss through gravitational waves.
The only thing besides the balloon (surface) is not-the-balloon (be it buildings or air, or, what have you).
Now, if we take the surface of the balloon as our "space", then anything not part of the surface is "not-space".
Unfortunately our definitions of "beyond" and "outside" depend upon space in a way that they do not depend upon a rubber membrane, so the analogy breaks down.
Under Windows NT, the "mortal" and "administrator" roles are ordinarily mingled in the same accounts, meaning some users running e.g. Outlook may also have write permission to the executables they use, which is required for a virus to spread.
In the default configuration of most Linux systems, no "mortal" users have write permission to any of the executables they would normally run.
In the case of a virus, at least, running together with Windows systems does not increase the risk to the Linux systems.
Actually I've generally had pretty good sucess with 2.4's USB. My Epson scanner worked fine out of the box (hotplug loaded the appropriate modules as soon as I plugged it in). Entries showed up automatically in/dev thanks to devfs, and SANE already had the requisite support.
Input devices like mice/tablets generally work fine too. The main fiddly thing at this point is USB storage -- my USB Zip drive is usable, but it's a little more fiddly with 2.4.14 than it should be.
People have been keeping secrets since the beginning of time.
I'd venture to say that the Venetians guarded their secret so closely because they understood the critical difference between an idea and a physical object. I'm sure they weren't worried about the eyeglasses themselves except as ordinary physical property.
There may be arbitrarily many pairs of eyeglasses (which cannot be easily shared), but there is only one idea of a specific method of manufacture, which must by definition be shared among those who "possess" it.
If posession of a physical thing meant the same as the posession of an idea, consider what it would be like if the eyeglasses were treated in the same fashion as the ideas about their manufacture. They certainly wouldn't be selling them.
The idea that ideas are even "property", an sich, is a pretty new thing, going back maybe 200 years at most.
Trying to frame the notion of ideas in the context of the Marxist debate over "property" (which really only works for physical things of economic value: excludable and limited) is conceding the real (cultural) battle.
It's impossible to prove that someone hasn't inserted themselves in between you and the server, giving you a bogus cert, and pretending to be you to the server.
This is the reason for trusted signatures on certs.
Hit google for "man in the middle attack" if you want to know more.
Electromigration of dopants in semiconductors are another factor.
Also, dissimilar metals being in contact over very long periods of time can have interesting interactions (they had to address such problems when renovating the Statue of Liberty, as the iron framework was reacting with the copper skin).
Slashdot Mirror
Not legally, no. Microsoft holds patents on the methods necessary to do this.
Yes. At least that's the way human psychology works.
... have to go now..."
We generally assume (it's a survival thing) that nobody acts out of pure altruism.
In the case of the $99.95, the guy is apparently being upfront about his motivations (what he gains from this exchange).
Okay, he might run off and you'll be out $99.95, but he isn't showing any immediate signs of having something more insidious in mind.
The other guy giving stuff away for free, on the other hand, seems to be hiding his true motivations (what he stands to gain) from you.
"What?" "Nothing." "Really?" "You want nothing in exchange?" "I want nothing in exchange." "...REALLY?" "Yes!" "Are you sure...?" "YES!" "Uh... yeah. I
We instinctively interpret evasiveness about motivations as a danger signal. We should. It's an important survival mechanism.
If you ever plan on giving away something for free, be darn sure you're either doing this in a subculture where it is normal (and thus there is a reasonable expectation of eventual reciprocation from the group -- e.g. open source circles), or be VERY clear about your motivations up front.
I submit this white powder for your opinion.
Apparently you've never used AOL. The normal means for web browsing (and this is all most AOL users use) is the mshtml control (IE) embedded in the AOL client window.
The change in AOL 7 will be that Gecko (Mozilla) is embedded there rather than IE.
No clicking on 'e' or (admittedly) stupid-looking lizards involved.
Now, it IS true that AOL users aren't all going to magically upgrade to AOL 7 once it comes out.
Fact: Scientists are mammals
It doesn't really matter until you meet the other person again anyway.
... but once you're both in the same reference frame again things will have settled out so that you agree on the "direction" of the discrepancy.
The acceleration along the path you each take determines who, if anyone, is ahead.
If your trips were mirror images of each other, then on the outgoing journey (accelerating away) you'd each see the other's clock slow down.
On the way back (accelerating towards one another), you'd each see the other's clocks speed up again until they were back in synch when you met.
If the trips were not completely symmetric, then there will be a discrepancy
You'd still need to do the simulation at the micro-level. The granularity of the simulation (or reality) has a big effect on the behavior of these kinds of systems.
Could you offer documentation, please?
How do projects like gv, Multivalent and xpdf (among others) manage?
*sigh* c.f. the consistent failure of climate and weather models that make macro-level approximiations
This is why they install video traps on cable modem-only customers' lines. Sounds like somebody got lazy.
Actually even on macro scales some quantum effects (e.g. quantum gravity) have observable results. For example, orbits decay faster than they otherwise might because of energy loss through gravitational waves.
The only thing besides the balloon (surface) is not-the-balloon (be it buildings or air, or, what have you).
Now, if we take the surface of the balloon as our "space", then anything not part of the surface is "not-space".
Unfortunately our definitions of "beyond" and "outside" depend upon space in a way that they do not depend upon a rubber membrane, so the analogy breaks down.
Analogies are only of limited use here.
People seem to respond to these things as if it represented a total reversal/revision of our understanding of existence.
I honestly don't see what difference it makes.
Depending on how simplified your laws of physics are, there are screensavers right now that would fit the bill.
As far as I can tell, it's a virus, not a worm.
Under Windows NT, the "mortal" and "administrator" roles are ordinarily mingled in the same accounts, meaning some users running e.g. Outlook may also have write permission to the executables they use, which is required for a virus to spread.
In the default configuration of most Linux systems, no "mortal" users have write permission to any of the executables they would normally run.
In the case of a virus, at least, running together with Windows systems does not increase the risk to the Linux systems.
Actually I've generally had pretty good sucess with 2.4's USB. My Epson scanner worked fine out of the box (hotplug loaded the appropriate modules as soon as I plugged it in). Entries showed up automatically in /dev thanks to devfs, and SANE already had the requisite support.
Input devices like mice/tablets generally work fine too. The main fiddly thing at this point is USB storage -- my USB Zip drive is usable, but it's a little more fiddly with 2.4.14 than it should be.
Maybe you _don't_ want to know...
To be fair, I don't think many of the NRA types are very happy about this either. Bush is a sweet-talker. They got taken.
Or pick your own favorite scripting language with decent XML libraries.
In a very limited fashion; the current copyright regime may very well be unconstitutional.
Certainly the technological measures required by e.g. CBDTPA go far, far beyond the effects of what is allowed for by the constitutional wording.
That's millions of people, you callous bastard.
People have been keeping secrets since the beginning of time.
I'd venture to say that the Venetians guarded their secret so closely because they understood the critical difference between an idea and a physical object. I'm sure they weren't worried about the eyeglasses themselves except as ordinary physical property.
There may be arbitrarily many pairs of eyeglasses (which cannot be easily shared), but there is only one idea of a specific method of manufacture, which must by definition be shared among those who "possess" it.
If posession of a physical thing meant the same as the posession of an idea, consider what it would be like if the eyeglasses were treated in the same fashion as the ideas about their manufacture. They certainly wouldn't be selling them.
The idea that ideas are even "property", an sich, is a pretty new thing, going back maybe 200 years at most.
Trying to frame the notion of ideas in the context of the Marxist debate over "property" (which really only works for physical things of economic value: excludable and limited) is conceding the real (cultural) battle.
It's impossible to prove that someone hasn't inserted themselves in between you and the server, giving you a bogus cert, and pretending to be you to the server.
This is the reason for trusted signatures on certs.
Hit google for "man in the middle attack" if you want to know more.
Electromigration of dopants in semiconductors are another factor.
Also, dissimilar metals being in contact over very long periods of time can have interesting interactions (they had to address such problems when renovating the Statue of Liberty, as the iron framework was reacting with the copper skin).
Mark Hamill has a really wonderful career as a voice actor, actually.