On a similar topic, MenuetOS is a full OS written in assembly and fits on a floppy. Yeah, lots of OS's used to fit on floppies, but it's still cool. It's amazing what all you can fit into a small space if you're careful.
What you're talking about here are often referred to as "Use Cases" under the Rational Unified Process for software development. Basically, the idea is to first think about what the product will be used for and who will use it. This involves at least some simple design of the UI. However, at this point in larger projects, the work is divided between several developers. Usually one or two developers or a small group will work on the User Interface, while other groups work on other logical structures (such as database access, or file system access or graphics processing or whatever). If I'm a developer doing this "back-end" work, then I really shouldn't care about the UI at all. That's up to the UI developers. What I do care about is the interface between the UI and my backend code.
I believe the original question was about how to design complex software so that this sort of development is possible (whether by a group or an individual). You're correct that good UI code and a proper understanding of the audience is crucial to a polished application. But without properly organizing the coding process, you end up with logic code mixed in with display code that becomes a mess to maintain and upgrade. Using this sort of architecture allows those who do understand good UI and Human Interface Factors the ability to focus on making the application suitable for the audience.
An object can orbit a black hole just like a planet can orbit the Sun (or a star). The Sun will not swallow or pull in the Earth any time soon. Black Holes are not cosmic vacuum cleaners that "suck" up everything around them. If you're in a stable orbit, it would be just like orbiting a Sun.
That said, there is evidence from general relativity that due to graviton radiation (gravity particles), large orbiting bodies slowly move closer to each other. The gravitons leaving such a system take energy out of the system slowly bringing the orbiting bodies together. This effect is (AFAIK) theoretical, although many people are currently working on ways to detect this graviton radiation and show that it is coming from systems like this. So in this case, yes, eventually (think eons) the star and the black hole would slowly move towards each other (the star would move more since it the least mass of the two) and in this type of collision, the black hole wins.
I've seen about 50 comments so far and all think the question is about User Interface design in terms of "Human Factors" as you mention. While Human Factors (and the book you mention) is important this is not what the poster is asking.
The poster is asking about software archecture and design patterns. Think of it this way: Okay I want to code a new IDE, but I want to code it well. So what's the best way to get the UI to talk to the code that actually compiles the source code. Or another example: a database management suite. How do I best seperate the UI code from the code that actually talks to the database. And once I have them in seperate modules, how do I get them to talk to each other? This is a question about computer software design, not UI design (although, UI design is very important). The advantage to thinking this way though, is that when software is coded this way, people who do understand "Human Factors" and proper User Interface Guidelines can tweek and adjust the UI without modifying the underlying code that performs the logic of the application.
The Model-View-Controller design pattern mentioned is a good start, although I'm not sure how well it scales to larger, more complex programs. (I'd love to hear from someone who has experience in this.) And of course the "Design Patterns" book by the 'Gang of Four' has other designs that might be more appropriate. Also, most complex applications will incorporate multiple design patterns.
This is a very interesting question, one I've had before and I haven't found any good resources yet either. Perhaps the best resource would be to actually go through the code of a complex program like Mozilla, OpenOffice, or the like. Fun? Easy? Probably not, but you'd learn a lot.
I've heard plenty of X-Windows complaints before, but I'm confused as to why no other solutions (that I know of) have been offered. X-Windows is pretty much the defacto windowing system for Unix/Linux/... if it's that bad, then why haven't more projects surfaced to solve the problems? Moreover, could someone with some real experience explain better what are the actual problems or drawbacks with X? I assume most of them are from a programmers perspective, so what are they?
This was brought up once before on an article about selling MMORPG items for real world cash -- what are the _real_ world legal consequences of this? Specifically what about taxes? Now granted, most of this is happening over ebay and places that make it hard to track, but still, what happens when the IRS knocks on your door and says, "Hey, I see that you have a level 40 bard with an amulet of zed. According to our research your account has a fair market value of $1000. I believe you're a little short on your taxes this year..."
Now yeah, I'm being simplistic, but the point is, if these online virtual economies continue to grow (and slip over into the real world), one day some legal genius is going to realize that there's money waiting to be collected. So what are these consequences? Do you think it's likely? What would be the liability of companies like Sony and Mythic?
That's the section I thought it might be, but the wording doesn't make it very clear (at least to me). If you find anything, I'd be interested to know.
email at jaaronfarr [at] yahoo [dot] com
And put text in saying to click through the security warning. Most people will, anyway.
An excellent example of why "computer security" is an oxymoron.
Seriously though, this is of why many viruses spread -- people are gullible and lax on security. While I really understand that getting a proper certificate can be expensive, I'm not sure if I want to encourage this type of behavior.
I've looked it over and I don't see what your talking about. Maybe my legal reading skills aren't up to par, but my understand was that copies could only be for personal use and that making copies for others is illegal even if I'm just giving them away. Am I wrong on that?
That IS the default as I understand it. That doesn't mean that a law backing up and clarifying a grey area that's very much under assault from the other side is a bad idea. I'm all for it.
I don't know. That's a very slippy slope you're talking about there. Determining "grey areas" is the responsibility of the courts, not the responsibility of the legislative branch (i.e.-congress).
Please note that there is already a project currently working on this. You may want to combine forces since they've been working on this since this last spring.
Okay, I understand that there are many reasons to dislike current copyright laws, but that is not to say that intellectual property right protection, be it patents or copyrights are a bad idea. It is their misapplication and abuse that result in the mess we often see today. Otherwise what do you propose to take their place?
Without some sort of protection guaranteeing that I can recoup the investment costs of creation (be it research and development or simply the creative costs of writing a novel), what incentive do I have to create anything to begin with? Why should I contribute *my* ideas so that you can do whatever you want with them, without my permission and without my compensation? If I labor, I am entitled to require payment for my labor -- it is trade. If my labor is then primarily mental rather than material, why should I expect less for my work?
The need for proper balanced intellectual property protection is needed now more than ever because with today's technology is it easier now more than ever to reproduce someone's mental labor. Now, balanced protection is important, and arguing what is balanced is difficult and honestly I don't currently have a better solution. However, to claim that all copyright protection is wrong only shows that one wants to do nothing but be a freeloader, feeding off the creative works that *others* produce claiming that you, who have produced nothing, have some divine right to benefit as well.
Advertizing could be done and it might be effective -- but size does matter. I don't think "banner" ads would work well because, think about it, if it's a wireless network, I'm probably on my PDA or small portable laptop, so I don't have much screen to deal with here. And if you fill up the screens with ads, well, then that's just a waste.
Then again, some advertizing could work because people will put up with some of it, even if they complain. I mean, how many people have actually stopped going to a website due to some small limited advertizing. Done in measures, the users will tolerate it. They may not like it, but they'll keep using the service because it's free, and you'll start having at least a small revenue source.
My Zaurus (just bought it a couple of weeks ago) has now effectly replaced my old laptop.
Now mind you, my laptop, in terms of processor power, wasn't much more powerful than the Zaurus. But it was much heavier. I can do everything on my Zaurus I used to do on my laptop and actually much more. It's much easier to carry around to classes or work. It's a perfect "datebook" and personal computer. I have faced a few bugs here and there, but you know, the nice thing was that I could often figure them out and fix them, while with my old palm I felt much more helpless.
Probably the thing I love the most is how easy it is to transfer information to and from the Zaurus. With my palm, all my files had to be converted and manipulated between formats. Now it's a matter of FTP or swapping a compact flash card. Text files are still text files, PDF files are still PDF files. I'm dealing with a real computer here which is wonderful.
Is the Zaurus perfect? No. In fact, there's plenty of people I would NOT recommend the Zaurus to. PDAs like any technology should be considered with need and use in mind and some people don't need a whole little Linux box in there pocket, a Palm works just fine. But for me, the Zaurus is one of those devices I've always been looking for.
Okay, just for a second, lets throw out the human aspect and forget about organized religion and look just at the existance of God and any set of ethics by which he/she/it/they exists and enforces. Now, let's start with a couple axioms. Suppose God exists and has this set of ethics. Also suppose that there is some other set of ethics/laws which are defined not by God, but my "pragmatism." For the sake of arguement I'll say these "pragmatic" ethics are universal truths of the same nature as the laws of physics and chemistry. They are self-evidant and any "pragmatic" person using reason and time would be able to discover them. This is what I believe you to mean by "ethics.. based around pragmatism." If I misunderstand, please let me know.
Okay, so we have God and his/her/its/their ethics and we have the pragmatic ethics. Now, it may be possible that these two set of ethics are disjoint, or there could be some overlapping or one could be a subset of the other. Regardless, I think the fundamental question is this: Is something right because God says it is, or does God say something is right because it is right? Think about it.
If the answer is the first, then there is no guarentee that there is any correlation between pragmatic ethics and God's ethics. It would be competely up to God's whim (if there is such a thing).
If the second is true, then by definition, God's ethics are the pragmatic ethics. They would be the same set.
Now, the existance of God is a question one is not going to be able to solve or prove rigoriously. However, it is my feeling that if there were such a being(s) that in order to be such a being(s), that being(s) would have to have an understanding of mathematics and the physical laws of nature (this to me seems reasonable considering the universe we are able to observe. It could be wrong, true, but I think the alternative is significantly less probable). So if this supreme being(s) had such an understanding, then it would be most likely that the set of ethics adopted by that being(s) would be the most "true", ie- pragmatic. Therefore, my feeling is that the existance of such a being(s) would imply that any ethics or judgements passed by such a being would be pragmatic/objective/true.
Now, that doesn't mean that should such a being(s) decide to communicate with the human species that the instructions given would be implemented properly. In fact, human experience would suggest otherwise. So I am willing to "see past" the efforts of most individuals (and religious organizations) in their implementation of such instruction and ethics and recognize that perhaps there is something underlying their actions which is more "correct."
The point of this rant is that in your arguement, like most others, you failed to be properly open minded and look at all the possibilities of the solution set. Should there be a God(s), I seriously doubt that he/she/it/they are contrained by the limits our unenlightened minds place on him/she/it/them. Is is possible that if there is a God(s) that his/her/its/their ethics are competely arbitrary? Yes. However, is it possible such ethics are in fact what you consider pragmatic? Yes. Therefore, one could reasonably believe in God, follow God's ethics, and also live pragmatically without any hypocracy. I just wanted to point this out.
Oh and if you have issues with my he/she/it/they thing, I'm just trying to further point out that we often have preconceved notions and we should learn to consider all alternatives until otherwise agreed upon.
The first mistake most people make (religious, athiest, or whatever) is incorrectly defining the problem and its scope. Your being too closed minded with your analysis.
Okay, so if there is a God and he/she/it/them/... and if the premise is that "God is good to people who really look for him" then that cannot be properly tested in any way. Why? Because how is God good to them? How many subtle ways might God have saved a person's life or changed it? Perhaps some hardship one faces is, in the long run, "better" for them. And what's more, if there is a God, then the it's quite likely that the "goodness" God will give to those who "really look for him" won't come until some sort of afterlife. And how could you measure that?
So the logic doesn't stand -- as most "logic" people use to claim existance or non-existance of God. Too often people limit the scope of possiblities and come to incorrect and inconsistant conclusions.
Can I simply make a request that if you are able to gather this information together in an organized format, could you please put it online for the rest of us? If so, maybe there can be a slashback getting the URL back to everyone. Thanks.
Can someone point out how this would be different than requiring the phone companies to keep 6 months of recordings of your home phone?
I think if it were looked at that way, people would realize how stupid and wrong this is. Why don't we start wearing embedded tracking devices and keep logs on that too?
I just bought a Zaurus from BestBuy this weekend -- the display module. I guess they are going to quit selling them.
Now I just started using it, but I've got to say, this thing is awesome! I probably wouldn't recommend it to someone new to PDAs though. In all honesty, the PIM (calendar, addressbook, etc.) applications included are kinda week. They're okay, but they're not as polished as what I'm used to with a Palm. The multimedia features are very impressive, but best of all is that you have an entire _real_ OS to work with. I've got apache and mysql running on it now. I can use a VNC client on my Zaurus to connect to my servers. I mean, come on, what else could you want?
While I don't expect the Zaurus to outpace Palm anytime soon, if Sharp keeps developing it, then I expect it to be a real contender. Oh, and there is a fairly active development community too. Try zauruszone for example. And there are some good replacements for the week PIM apps that come with it ( thekompany has some really nice ones for a couple dollars too).
Of, relating to, or suggestive of a proprietor or to proprietors as a group: had proprietary rights; behaved with a proprietary air in his friend's house.
Exclusively owned; private: a proprietary hospital.
Owned by a private individual or corporation under a trademark or patent: a proprietary drug.
I know I'll probably get flamed for this, but you know, I always thought property rights were a good thing. WINE chose to license their work as they did just so that someone like Transgaming *could* come along and do what they're doing. Besides that, Transgaming has been putting forth an effort to both (1) make a profit and (2) give back to the community. If someone works hard and choses to not give that work away to the community for free, that's their choice, but it's not BAD.
Read the article...
on
Haiku vs Spam
·
· Score: 4, Informative
Should they be entrusting this job to corporate America, instead?
YES. Look, I don't care if you like M$ or any other corporation, but the US Government (or any government for that matter) shouldn't be doing the job that some other reasonable business could be doing. The government is to provide for those products and services that are NOT viable business ventures, ie- national defense via the military. There's no reason the government should be monopolizing business opportunities that competent individuals and corportations can do.
That said, what probably should happen is the NSA hire some corporation to do the work and have it stipulated that after the work is done and paid for the code be released to the public under some sort of Open Source License.
I'm not much of a Solaris expert -- I've worked on Solaris systems for development, but never been a SysAdmin for a Solaris setup.
That said, I think the biggest current advantage of Solaris over Linux is scalability. For smaller shops and servers, this isn't too big an issue, but when you're producing some of the top of the line servers like Sun, scalability is key. Last I check, the linux kernal has issues running on more than 8 processors (this could be old news and out dated though). If someone has more insight on this issue, I'd love to hear it.
Slashdot Mirror
On a similar topic, MenuetOS is a full OS written in assembly and fits on a floppy. Yeah, lots of OS's used to fit on floppies, but it's still cool. It's amazing what all you can fit into a small space if you're careful.
What you're talking about here are often referred to as "Use Cases" under the Rational Unified Process for software development. Basically, the idea is to first think about what the product will be used for and who will use it. This involves at least some simple design of the UI. However, at this point in larger projects, the work is divided between several developers. Usually one or two developers or a small group will work on the User Interface, while other groups work on other logical structures (such as database access, or file system access or graphics processing or whatever). If I'm a developer doing this "back-end" work, then I really shouldn't care about the UI at all. That's up to the UI developers. What I do care about is the interface between the UI and my backend code.
I believe the original question was about how to design complex software so that this sort of development is possible (whether by a group or an individual). You're correct that good UI code and a proper understanding of the audience is crucial to a polished application. But without properly organizing the coding process, you end up with logic code mixed in with display code that becomes a mess to maintain and upgrade. Using this sort of architecture allows those who do understand good UI and Human Interface Factors the ability to focus on making the application suitable for the audience.
An object can orbit a black hole just like a planet can orbit the Sun (or a star). The Sun will not swallow or pull in the Earth any time soon. Black Holes are not cosmic vacuum cleaners that "suck" up everything around them. If you're in a stable orbit, it would be just like orbiting a Sun.
That said, there is evidence from general relativity that due to graviton radiation (gravity particles), large orbiting bodies slowly move closer to each other. The gravitons leaving such a system take energy out of the system slowly bringing the orbiting bodies together. This effect is (AFAIK) theoretical, although many people are currently working on ways to detect this graviton radiation and show that it is coming from systems like this. So in this case, yes, eventually (think eons) the star and the black hole would slowly move towards each other (the star would move more since it the least mass of the two) and in this type of collision, the black hole wins.
I've seen about 50 comments so far and all think the question is about User Interface design in terms of "Human Factors" as you mention. While Human Factors (and the book you mention) is important this is not what the poster is asking.
The poster is asking about software archecture and design patterns. Think of it this way: Okay I want to code a new IDE, but I want to code it well. So what's the best way to get the UI to talk to the code that actually compiles the source code. Or another example: a database management suite. How do I best seperate the UI code from the code that actually talks to the database. And once I have them in seperate modules, how do I get them to talk to each other? This is a question about computer software design, not UI design (although, UI design is very important). The advantage to thinking this way though, is that when software is coded this way, people who do understand "Human Factors" and proper User Interface Guidelines can tweek and adjust the UI without modifying the underlying code that performs the logic of the application.
The Model-View-Controller design pattern mentioned is a good start, although I'm not sure how well it scales to larger, more complex programs. (I'd love to hear from someone who has experience in this.) And of course the "Design Patterns" book by the 'Gang of Four' has other designs that might be more appropriate. Also, most complex applications will incorporate multiple design patterns.
This is a very interesting question, one I've had before and I haven't found any good resources yet either. Perhaps the best resource would be to actually go through the code of a complex program like Mozilla, OpenOffice, or the like. Fun? Easy? Probably not, but you'd learn a lot.
I've heard plenty of X-Windows complaints before, but I'm confused as to why no other solutions (that I know of) have been offered. X-Windows is pretty much the defacto windowing system for Unix/Linux/... if it's that bad, then why haven't more projects surfaced to solve the problems? Moreover, could someone with some real experience explain better what are the actual problems or drawbacks with X? I assume most of them are from a programmers perspective, so what are they?
This was brought up once before on an article about selling MMORPG items for real world cash -- what are the _real_ world legal consequences of this? Specifically what about taxes? Now granted, most of this is happening over ebay and places that make it hard to track, but still, what happens when the IRS knocks on your door and says, "Hey, I see that you have a level 40 bard with an amulet of zed. According to our research your account has a fair market value of $1000. I believe you're a little short on your taxes this year..."
Now yeah, I'm being simplistic, but the point is, if these online virtual economies continue to grow (and slip over into the real world), one day some legal genius is going to realize that there's money waiting to be collected. So what are these consequences? Do you think it's likely? What would be the liability of companies like Sony and Mythic?
That's the section I thought it might be, but the wording doesn't make it very clear (at least to me). If you find anything, I'd be interested to know. email at jaaronfarr [at] yahoo [dot] com
And put text in saying to click through the security warning. Most people will, anyway.
An excellent example of why "computer security" is an oxymoron.
Seriously though, this is of why many viruses spread -- people are gullible and lax on security. While I really understand that getting a proper certificate can be expensive, I'm not sure if I want to encourage this type of behavior.
I've found a copy of the AHRA on the web at http://www.virtualrecordings.com/ahra.htm.
I've looked it over and I don't see what your talking about. Maybe my legal reading skills aren't up to par, but my understand was that copies could only be for personal use and that making copies for others is illegal even if I'm just giving them away. Am I wrong on that?
That IS the default as I understand it. That doesn't mean that a law backing up and clarifying a grey area that's very much under assault from the other side is a bad idea. I'm all for it.
I don't know. That's a very slippy slope you're talking about there. Determining "grey areas" is the responsibility of the courts, not the responsibility of the legislative branch (i.e.-congress).
Please note that there is already a project currently working on this. You may want to combine forces since they've been working on this since this last spring.
Check out the OpenCD project at
http://www.theopencd.org/
You are free to work on your on project of course, but I HATE to see duplication of effort.
Okay, I understand that there are many reasons to dislike current copyright laws, but that is not to say that intellectual property right protection, be it patents or copyrights are a bad idea. It is their misapplication and abuse that result in the mess we often see today. Otherwise what do you propose to take their place?
Without some sort of protection guaranteeing that I can recoup the investment costs of creation (be it research and development or simply the creative costs of writing a novel), what incentive do I have to create anything to begin with? Why should I contribute *my* ideas so that you can do whatever you want with them, without my permission and without my compensation? If I labor, I am entitled to require payment for my labor -- it is trade. If my labor is then primarily mental rather than material, why should I expect less for my work?
The need for proper balanced intellectual property protection is needed now more than ever because with today's technology is it easier now more than ever to reproduce someone's mental labor. Now, balanced protection is important, and arguing what is balanced is difficult and honestly I don't currently have a better solution. However, to claim that all copyright protection is wrong only shows that one wants to do nothing but be a freeloader, feeding off the creative works that *others* produce claiming that you, who have produced nothing, have some divine right to benefit as well.
Advertizing could be done and it might be effective -- but size does matter. I don't think "banner" ads would work well because, think about it, if it's a wireless network, I'm probably on my PDA or small portable laptop, so I don't have much screen to deal with here. And if you fill up the screens with ads, well, then that's just a waste.
Then again, some advertizing could work because people will put up with some of it, even if they complain. I mean, how many people have actually stopped going to a website due to some small limited advertizing. Done in measures, the users will tolerate it. They may not like it, but they'll keep using the service because it's free, and you'll start having at least a small revenue source.
My Zaurus (just bought it a couple of weeks ago) has now effectly replaced my old laptop.
Now mind you, my laptop, in terms of processor power, wasn't much more powerful than the Zaurus. But it was much heavier. I can do everything on my Zaurus I used to do on my laptop and actually much more. It's much easier to carry around to classes or work. It's a perfect "datebook" and personal computer. I have faced a few bugs here and there, but you know, the nice thing was that I could often figure them out and fix them, while with my old palm I felt much more helpless.
Probably the thing I love the most is how easy it is to transfer information to and from the Zaurus. With my palm, all my files had to be converted and manipulated between formats. Now it's a matter of FTP or swapping a compact flash card. Text files are still text files, PDF files are still PDF files. I'm dealing with a real computer here which is wonderful.
Is the Zaurus perfect? No. In fact, there's plenty of people I would NOT recommend the Zaurus to. PDAs like any technology should be considered with need and use in mind and some people don't need a whole little Linux box in there pocket, a Palm works just fine. But for me, the Zaurus is one of those devices I've always been looking for.
Of course the only reason an afterlife is posited is to answer the question "Why do bad things happen to good people?"
Or there actually could be an afterlife.
Who's to say that God isn't pragmatic?
.. based around pragmatism." If I misunderstand, please let me know.
Okay, just for a second, lets throw out the human aspect and forget about organized religion and look just at the existance of God and any set of ethics by which he/she/it/they exists and enforces. Now, let's start with a couple axioms. Suppose God exists and has this set of ethics. Also suppose that there is some other set of ethics/laws which are defined not by God, but my "pragmatism." For the sake of arguement I'll say these "pragmatic" ethics are universal truths of the same nature as the laws of physics and chemistry. They are self-evidant and any "pragmatic" person using reason and time would be able to discover them. This is what I believe you to mean by "ethics
Okay, so we have God and his/her/its/their ethics and we have the pragmatic ethics. Now, it may be possible that these two set of ethics are disjoint, or there could be some overlapping or one could be a subset of the other. Regardless, I think the fundamental question is this: Is something right because God says it is, or does God say something is right because it is right? Think about it.
If the answer is the first, then there is no guarentee that there is any correlation between pragmatic ethics and God's ethics. It would be competely up to God's whim (if there is such a thing).
If the second is true, then by definition, God's ethics are the pragmatic ethics. They would be the same set.
Now, the existance of God is a question one is not going to be able to solve or prove rigoriously. However, it is my feeling that if there were such a being(s) that in order to be such a being(s), that being(s) would have to have an understanding of mathematics and the physical laws of nature (this to me seems reasonable considering the universe we are able to observe. It could be wrong, true, but I think the alternative is significantly less probable). So if this supreme being(s) had such an understanding, then it would be most likely that the set of ethics adopted by that being(s) would be the most "true", ie- pragmatic. Therefore, my feeling is that the existance of such a being(s) would imply that any ethics or judgements passed by such a being would be pragmatic/objective/true.
Now, that doesn't mean that should such a being(s) decide to communicate with the human species that the instructions given would be implemented properly. In fact, human experience would suggest otherwise. So I am willing to "see past" the efforts of most individuals (and religious organizations) in their implementation of such instruction and ethics and recognize that perhaps there is something underlying their actions which is more "correct."
The point of this rant is that in your arguement, like most others, you failed to be properly open minded and look at all the possibilities of the solution set. Should there be a God(s), I seriously doubt that he/she/it/they are contrained by the limits our unenlightened minds place on him/she/it/them. Is is possible that if there is a God(s) that his/her/its/their ethics are competely arbitrary? Yes. However, is it possible such ethics are in fact what you consider pragmatic? Yes. Therefore, one could reasonably believe in God, follow God's ethics, and also live pragmatically without any hypocracy. I just wanted to point this out.
Oh and if you have issues with my he/she/it/they thing, I'm just trying to further point out that we often have preconceved notions and we should learn to consider all alternatives until otherwise agreed upon.
The first mistake most people make (religious, athiest, or whatever) is incorrectly defining the problem and its scope. Your being too closed minded with your analysis.
Okay, so if there is a God and he/she/it/them/... and if the premise is that "God is good to people who really look for him" then that cannot be properly tested in any way. Why? Because how is God good to them? How many subtle ways might God have saved a person's life or changed it? Perhaps some hardship one faces is, in the long run, "better" for them. And what's more, if there is a God, then the it's quite likely that the "goodness" God will give to those who "really look for him" won't come until some sort of afterlife. And how could you measure that?
So the logic doesn't stand -- as most "logic" people use to claim existance or non-existance of God. Too often people limit the scope of possiblities and come to incorrect and inconsistant conclusions.
Can I simply make a request that if you are able to gather this information together in an organized format, could you please put it online for the rest of us? If so, maybe there can be a slashback getting the URL back to everyone. Thanks.
Can someone point out how this would be different than requiring the phone companies to keep 6 months of recordings of your home phone?
I think if it were looked at that way, people would realize how stupid and wrong this is. Why don't we start wearing embedded tracking devices and keep logs on that too?
I just bought a Zaurus from BestBuy this weekend -- the display module. I guess they are going to quit selling them.
Now I just started using it, but I've got to say, this thing is awesome! I probably wouldn't recommend it to someone new to PDAs though. In all honesty, the PIM (calendar, addressbook, etc.) applications included are kinda week. They're okay, but they're not as polished as what I'm used to with a Palm. The multimedia features are very impressive, but best of all is that you have an entire _real_ OS to work with. I've got apache and mysql running on it now. I can use a VNC client on my Zaurus to connect to my servers. I mean, come on, what else could you want?
While I don't expect the Zaurus to outpace Palm anytime soon, if Sharp keeps developing it, then I expect it to be a real contender. Oh, and there is a fairly active development community too. Try zauruszone for example. And there are some good replacements for the week PIM apps that come with it ( thekompany has some really nice ones for a couple dollars too).
proprietary (adj).
Of, relating to, or suggestive of a proprietor or to proprietors as a group: had proprietary rights; behaved with a proprietary air in his friend's house.
Exclusively owned; private: a proprietary hospital.
Owned by a private individual or corporation under a trademark or patent: a proprietary drug.
I know I'll probably get flamed for this, but you know, I always thought property rights were a good thing. WINE chose to license their work as they did just so that someone like Transgaming *could* come along and do what they're doing. Besides that, Transgaming has been putting forth an effort to both (1) make a profit and (2) give back to the community. If someone works hard and choses to not give that work away to the community for free, that's their choice, but it's not BAD.
read the article
mystery revealed to you
poem placed in header
Just wondering, version 3.0 or 2.x?
Should they be entrusting this job to corporate America, instead?
YES. Look, I don't care if you like M$ or any other corporation, but the US Government (or any government for that matter) shouldn't be doing the job that some other reasonable business could be doing. The government is to provide for those products and services that are NOT viable business ventures, ie- national defense via the military. There's no reason the government should be monopolizing business opportunities that competent individuals and corportations can do.
That said, what probably should happen is the NSA hire some corporation to do the work and have it stipulated that after the work is done and paid for the code be released to the public under some sort of Open Source License.
I'm not much of a Solaris expert -- I've worked on Solaris systems for development, but never been a SysAdmin for a Solaris setup.
That said, I think the biggest current advantage of Solaris over Linux is scalability. For smaller shops and servers, this isn't too big an issue, but when you're producing some of the top of the line servers like Sun, scalability is key. Last I check, the linux kernal has issues running on more than 8 processors (this could be old news and out dated though). If someone has more insight on this issue, I'd love to hear it.