That's why I prefer Bavarian beer... Hefeweizen, or Weissbier, as we call it. Since I was born in Bavaria, I'm probably a little biased when it comes to beer, but after drinking larger quantities of American beer I regularly wake up with a bad headache the next morning. After comparable quantities of Bavarian beer I feel fine, even though it's slightly stronger (the beer, not the headache). The difference might well be due to the yeast, as you suggest.
Ubuntu is the most shiny Debian-based distrobution ever
This is getting painful. Would someone please teach the slashdot editors how to use a spellchecker? (Don't get me started on grammar...) Maybe I should write a HOWTO...?
I'd say it probably will have about the same effect as planting forests or constructing tall buildings. Of course it might have some effect, since the atmosphere is a chaotic system, but I think the important point is that we don't make any fundamental changes to the system. To make my point clear, adding pollutants to the atmosphere, or depleting the ozone layer to the point where it shows holes, I would view as fundamental changes. On the other hand, putting obstacles into the path of the wind isn't. Mountain ranges are much bigger obstacles and probably dwarf the effect of wind turbines on the weather.
The microclimate might change in some areas, though. Maybe the east coast weather could even become more moderate if we introduce "artificial mountain ranges" with these turbines.
Not quite; the restricted three-body problem, where one of the masses is infinitessimal compared to the other two, can be solved analytically.
Not quite; your example is not a three-body problem, but really a two-body problem in disguise. The equations of motion for the two finite masses can be solved separately, since they are not influenced by the infinitesimal mass. Then the problem reduces to a single particle (the one with infinitesimal mass) travelling in a time-varying field.
Also: if the C++ symbols will be stored as (name space + package + class + method) in that order, ELF is used, and there are many hash collisions, this might create a lot of overhead loading large C++ libraries. The reason: while linking, you'd have to compare a lot of text before matching, because so many symbol entries would have a common prefix that you'd have to keep matching over and over again. Am I reading this correctly?
IANACS, but to my knowledge a hash table doesn't store its entries in alphabetical order, but according to a hash key that is computed from the entry value in some non-trivial way (for example, it could be computed by XOR-ing all the letters in the symbol name together). If that's the case, a common prefix shouldn't affect the hash performance at all. Please correct me if I'm wrong.
I mean, switching between rendering engines just to access a particular site sounds annoying.
Unless they include an option to associate a specific engine with specific pages, similar to the way it's done for the browser identification string. Then it wouldn't be much of a hassle anymore.
Music through speakers the size of a dime, thats gotta sound great. Whatever happened to doing one thing and doing it well?
I'm sure there are headphones available. I, for one, would certainly buy an all-in-one device, as soon as they build one that fits my needs and my budget. It certainly makes more sense than carrying half a dozen individual gadgets for making phone calls, getting information off the web, listening to music, taking notes, etc.
How about we just replace the current moderation system with things like "right-wing nut" or "leftist looser"? Those labels would be neither positive or negative, but your Karma rating would read something along the lines of "Ultra-left", "Moderate right", or "Unprincipled opportunist".
This way, if you enjoy reading only opinions that mirror your own, you can choose "Threshold: display only messages to the right of Rush Limbaugh (0 posts)" or something similar.
I'd vote for Nader anytime if it wouldn't indirectly benefit the Republicans. This is where the American election system is simply flawed - vote for a small party, and your vote is effectively lost for the presidential elections. I'd much prefer a coalition system like Canada and many European countries have. But I'm not counting on anything changing during my lifetime, since the two big parties obviously benefit from the current system.
I agree. The best way, imho, would be to turn every possible feature into an extension, and then let the user select extensions during install. That is, you'd have a choice between a default install, which automatically installs a "standard extensions" package, or a customized install, which lets you choose exactly which extensions you want to have on your system.
You can probably safely add the "I dunno, what's a browser?" people, the "blue thing" people, and the "Google" people to the Internet Explorer category. Let's see: 20% + 37% + 15% + 5% = 77%. Works out perfectly!
thank you for informing us that there are two more crappy movies available on DVD. Would you please be so kind as to explain exactly why we should consider this to be relevant news?
"Fogerty was also sued for plagiarizing himself as Fantasy's lawyers thought that The Old Man Down The Road from the same album was Run Through The Jungle with new lyrics."
Oh dear. The good old times when copyrights served to protect the artist are really long, long gone.
Not really internet related, but I think Douglas Adams' greatest achievement is that he provided us with a simple answer to the question about life, the universe, and everything. Whenever you engage in a metaphysical discussion about the meaning of life, his answer will invariably come up at some point.
Canada's copyright laws are quite friendly towards the consumer. For example, it's perfectly legal to borrow CDs from the public library and make personal copies. In this case I would make an educated guess that the company can't just overturn the Fair Use laws by some blurb in the licence agreement.
Do you honestly believe that all these companies invested so much in DVD-Video out of the goodness of their hearts?
No.
And now that they want to cash in on their investment, you decide that's morally wrong?
No.
I wrote some custom laser light show software last year. I suppose you feel you have a right to steal that too?
No.
If you just take a look at the topic of this thread, you would realize that we are talking here about watching DVDs under Linux, not about copyright infringement. DVDs are encrypted, supposedly to protect their content and make it harder to produce illegal copies. As the law stands right now, it is perfectly legal for me to copy the encrypted content of a DVD to my hard drive under Linux, and then burn a backup copy to another DVD. That's simply fair use, and is your right. What is illegal, however, thanks to the DMCA, is to decrypt the content in order to actually watch the movie on my computer. Now please explain to me how this is supposed to prevent copyright infringement.
The developers of DVD technology can make their money by licencing their technology to the makers of DVD players, and to DVD manufacturers. As a user of their technology, I therefore have paid my dues to the developers, since I have paid money for DVD player and DVDs, part of which goes to the developers. Why should I have to pay extra licence fees to decrypt the content? Encryption is not some revolutionary technology that was invented by these people.
What the DMCA and this law is all about is content protection. And don't get me wrong - I think the copyright holders have a valid right to prevent people from making and distributing illegal copies. But as I said before, this law does nothing to prevent copyright infringement. All it does is to force me to buy some proprietary, closed-source software for something that free, open-source tools can do as well. And the money I'm paying for this goes into the wrong pockets. I should not have to pay for making fair-use copies.
I hope you realize that defending our fair-use rights is not the same as defending copyright infringement. Until quite recently commercial DVD players were not even available for Linux (but many free ones were), so I would have been forced to shell out a few hundred bucks to watch DVDs on my computer. This is what I'm saying is wrong - forcing me to pay for software that's only doing what free software can do equally well and better.
Well, you won't be browsing the web for quite some time while you restore from backup. Ooops, I forgot, you don't have enough self-discipline to keep from browsing the web and need a script to lock you out. Guess backing up would be asking way too much.
Bah. Just boot from CD or floppy, chroot to your old environment, and reset the root password. Unless, of course, you also forgot your BIOS password. Then you're really screwed.
Whether you like it or not, it's proprietary technology. They have a right to keep it closed. They have a right to charge you whatever they want for it.
Just because something is "legal" doesn't mean it's "good". Yes, the corporations have a right to licence their technology in any way they want, but this money-grubbing is still morally despicable. DVD decoders can be written without infringing anybody's copyright, and it makes absolutely no sense to make DVD decoding illegal, unless all you care about is lining your own pockets.
Therefore I think we have a right (both legally and morally) to complain about it.
Slashdot Mirror
Prost!
This is getting painful. Would someone please teach the slashdot editors how to use a spellchecker? (Don't get me started on grammar...) Maybe I should write a HOWTO...?
The microclimate might change in some areas, though. Maybe the east coast weather could even become more moderate if we introduce "artificial mountain ranges" with these turbines.
Not quite; your example is not a three-body problem, but really a two-body problem in disguise. The equations of motion for the two finite masses can be solved separately, since they are not influenced by the infinitesimal mass. Then the problem reduces to a single particle (the one with infinitesimal mass) travelling in a time-varying field.
But speaking from my guts, I'd say I support your idea.
Forgive me if this joke has been posted a 1000 times before... ;-)
IANACS, but to my knowledge a hash table doesn't store its entries in alphabetical order, but according to a hash key that is computed from the entry value in some non-trivial way (for example, it could be computed by XOR-ing all the letters in the symbol name together). If that's the case, a common prefix shouldn't affect the hash performance at all. Please correct me if I'm wrong.
Unless they include an option to associate a specific engine with specific pages, similar to the way it's done for the browser identification string. Then it wouldn't be much of a hassle anymore.
I'm sure there are headphones available. I, for one, would certainly buy an all-in-one device, as soon as they build one that fits my needs and my budget. It certainly makes more sense than carrying half a dozen individual gadgets for making phone calls, getting information off the web, listening to music, taking notes, etc.
That's über-cool! I always wanted a cell with a built-in microphone. Now I can finally talk to the people I call!
This way, if you enjoy reading only opinions that mirror your own, you can choose "Threshold: display only messages to the right of Rush Limbaugh (0 posts)" or something similar.
I'd vote for Nader anytime if it wouldn't indirectly benefit the Republicans. This is where the American election system is simply flawed - vote for a small party, and your vote is effectively lost for the presidential elections. I'd much prefer a coalition system like Canada and many European countries have. But I'm not counting on anything changing during my lifetime, since the two big parties obviously benefit from the current system.
Agreed. Now if they would only apply the same standards to the Pentagon's research spending... ;-)
I agree. The best way, imho, would be to turn every possible feature into an extension, and then let the user select extensions during install. That is, you'd have a choice between a default install, which automatically installs a "standard extensions" package, or a customized install, which lets you choose exactly which extensions you want to have on your system.
Oh, I get it... it was a joke...
thank you for informing us that there are two more crappy movies available on DVD. Would you please be so kind as to explain exactly why we should consider this to be relevant news?
Thank you
Uhm... to get a doppler shift of that magnitude, wouldn't the planet's surface have to rotate with a velocity close to the speed of light?
Maybe there's a more reasonable explanation for this...
Oh dear. The good old times when copyrights served to protect the artist are really long, long gone.
Not really internet related, but I think Douglas Adams' greatest achievement is that he provided us with a simple answer to the question about life, the universe, and everything. Whenever you engage in a metaphysical discussion about the meaning of life, his answer will invariably come up at some point.
Simple solution: put all your files into your public_html folder!
Common law always wins over individual licenses.
Disclaimer: IANAL
I-N-C-O-M-P-A-T-I-B-L-E
No.
And now that they want to cash in on their investment, you decide that's morally wrong?
No.
I wrote some custom laser light show software last year. I suppose you feel you have a right to steal that too?
No.
If you just take a look at the topic of this thread, you would realize that we are talking here about watching DVDs under Linux, not about copyright infringement. DVDs are encrypted, supposedly to protect their content and make it harder to produce illegal copies. As the law stands right now, it is perfectly legal for me to copy the encrypted content of a DVD to my hard drive under Linux, and then burn a backup copy to another DVD. That's simply fair use, and is your right. What is illegal, however, thanks to the DMCA, is to decrypt the content in order to actually watch the movie on my computer. Now please explain to me how this is supposed to prevent copyright infringement.
The developers of DVD technology can make their money by licencing their technology to the makers of DVD players, and to DVD manufacturers. As a user of their technology, I therefore have paid my dues to the developers, since I have paid money for DVD player and DVDs, part of which goes to the developers. Why should I have to pay extra licence fees to decrypt the content? Encryption is not some revolutionary technology that was invented by these people.
What the DMCA and this law is all about is content protection. And don't get me wrong - I think the copyright holders have a valid right to prevent people from making and distributing illegal copies. But as I said before, this law does nothing to prevent copyright infringement. All it does is to force me to buy some proprietary, closed-source software for something that free, open-source tools can do as well. And the money I'm paying for this goes into the wrong pockets. I should not have to pay for making fair-use copies.
I hope you realize that defending our fair-use rights is not the same as defending copyright infringement. Until quite recently commercial DVD players were not even available for Linux (but many free ones were), so I would have been forced to shell out a few hundred bucks to watch DVDs on my computer. This is what I'm saying is wrong - forcing me to pay for software that's only doing what free software can do equally well and better.
Bah. Just boot from CD or floppy, chroot to your old environment, and reset the root password. Unless, of course, you also forgot your BIOS password. Then you're really screwed.
Just because something is "legal" doesn't mean it's "good". Yes, the corporations have a right to licence their technology in any way they want, but this money-grubbing is still morally despicable. DVD decoders can be written without infringing anybody's copyright, and it makes absolutely no sense to make DVD decoding illegal, unless all you care about is lining your own pockets.
Therefore I think we have a right (both legally and morally) to complain about it.