> And does anyone remember when Slashdot pulled its Spider-Man 2 review because of plagiarism?
Plagiarism is unrelated.
Copyright has to do with permission to copy something. If you don't have permission to copy a copyrighted work (from the copyright holder) it is a copyright violation to do so. This is mitigated by Fair Use in many cases, but the principle remains.
Plagiarism is fraud. It is passing off someone else's work as your own. It may also be copyright violation, but it doesn't have to be. The two are orthogonal.
Telling point. I'm pretty sure it's the body of the engine itself that would contain the high velocity parts of the engine, and not the cowling, but you're probably right that a handgun round probably wouldn't penetrate to the blades. But it could easily damage the engine sufficiently to shut it down. There's lots of critical plumbing around the engine that doesn't have much protection.
Sorry, but explosive decompression or not, airplanes are fragile.
Flying pieces of metal inside an airplane is not a good idea. the engines are close by, and not protected. Ditto other essential systems, not the least the cockpit.
We have locking cockpit doors now. (So far the ONLY useful thing to come out of the TSA.) You want to take a step back and breach that protection?
Not so much Microsoft giving cash incentives, but all the ISVs that pay the manufacturer to install "trial versions" of their software on the machines. I guess that does include Microsoft if you count the trial versions of Office, etc.
It's the crapware (AKA bloatware) that gives you your discount. Such as it is. Linux doesn't have that going for it.
Not easily, however. The litigation costs are high enough that it's cheaper to pay the protection racket. Multi-billion dollar corporations make decisions like this all the time -- if it's cheaper to cave to ridiculous claims than to fight them, then they'll roll right over. Even if they could win the fight.
And if the fight is in East Texas (like it commonly is) even poor quality patents are frequently upheld, so winning is up in the air no matter how strong the case against the patent holder.
Guess it depends where you were. I'm 56, and when I went to high school all I had available were chain stores. When I got to college, I'm not sure there were any chain stores in town -- all the record stores were local.
I've had students ask to record lectures. I'm not sure how useful it is, but I always say yes.
When I was going to school, I'm not sure I heard some of the lectures, because I was always so busy copying the equations down. One physics professor had the left hand wall full before class started, and he worked his way around the front and the right hand wall over the course of the class. Sometimes he finished up on the left side again, eraser in one hand and chalk in the other...
Maybe a recorder would have been useful then, at that.
That's the same boat I'm in. I see all these elaborate schemes posted here -- multi-part keys where each relative has one portion of the key, etc. Is anyone actually *doing* this stuff? And realistically planning on keeping this up to date for the next 40 or 50 years (for those 20-somethings)?
If you're not doing it for your own use, then I think you're fooling yourself about having your scheme workable over the long term. Set it up so that it solves the unexpected death issue, sure, but it had better have immediate and practical utility or you'll let it lapse.
I'm on the second phone with this password database. I don't expect it will be the last. I don't keep this database for my heirs, I keep it for me. That means that I keep it up to date, and that I will move it to the next device when I replace the current one.
I don't know about anyone else, but if I'm making provision to make things easier for my heirs, I'll do it when I think about it -- which may not be that often. If I'm doing it for me but it has a side benefit for them, then it's going to be up to date and working.
True, if the phone is with me and is destroyed in my violent demise, my heirs may have a problem. Since my goal is to die in bed, many years from now, the violent demise is not really part of my planning.
I keep all my passwords on my phone in an encrypted database. The people that matter know my master password on that database, but they don't (currently) have physical access to my phone. That will change after I'm gone.
I agree. My Perl code looks a lot like C, since I was a C programmer when I picked up Perl. It's just the way I approach it. A lot of the Perl-ish syntax I find confusing, but I don't use most of it, so it's not much of a problem. For me, anyway.
I'm with you there. I've always defined SciFi as "bad science fiction." By that definition "best SciFi" is an oxymoron.
As an earlier poster pointed out, much of the reason that SF and Fantasy are usually grouped together is that (especially in the early days) they were written by the same people. The author of _Tau Zero_ (hard SF) was also the author of _Operation Chaos_ (fantasy.) And at about the same time.
Both SF and Fantasy are about world building. This is obvious in both better SF and better fantasy. Authors that ignore this step (and there are many) may mimic the form of either SF or fantasy but generally produce forgettable work.
Gnome devs have never liked the "focus follows mouse" paradigm. After much strife, they finally condescended to include a flag buried in the Metacity code that would allow it (with embedded comments about how it was a bad idea.) For a long time, one of the advantages that I saw in running Gentoo was that I could actually edit that code and fix it, since I was going to be compiling it anyway.
Having to use gconf-editor to set the proper focus policy was an *improvement*!
The carbon fiber flywheels shred, so you don't get big chunks that would punch through an enclosure. You do need a strong enclosure though. Another posted cited shortage of titanium for the enclosures as being a reason these didn't catch on, which makes sense to me.
Traditional metal flywheels normally break into 3 asymmetric pieces, and no reasonable enclosure can handle that. The enclosures that I was reading about in the 70s had been successful at containing failures of the fiber flywheels.
Yeah, counter-rotating flywheels would certainly eliminate the asymmetric gyroscopic effects and the other effects might actually include increased stability. I didn't know about the titanium shielding, but it makes sense.
But once we start talking about 10 hour charge times for batteries, 5-15 minutes might start sounding attractive. Fast charging a battery damages it over the long term, but the real limit to spinning up a flywheel is how fast you can deliver the power.
In the 70s there was some speculation on flywheels for energy storage. High energy density, even higher power density (charge and discharge can be *very* fast) and some designs (called "superflywheels" and made with carbon fiber) were claimed to fail gracefully without big chunks breaking through their containment vessels. Not sure what ever happened to those plans.
You did have to engineer around some "interesting" gyroscopic effects if you planned to put them in a vehicle though.
He didn't say when it was he tried to do this. If it was, say 1978 or so (to pull a date out of a hat) would *you* have known where it was all supposed to go? I know *I* wouldn't have. I thought about building a kit computer back then but wasn't brave enough (or rich enough.)
It's not horrible on my Bionic. That would be a step up.
It freezes immediately. Can't even scroll around on the page. I've installed it a couple of times, hoping that the problem was a bad version, or corrupted, or something, but it just doesn't work here.
Despite my growing dissatisfaction with the desktop version, I still use it as my primary browser (mainly because I'm not thrilled with any of their competition either.) I was hoping that the constraints on a mobile device would moderate the Firefox devs' strange ideas on interface design, but it turns out it doesn't matter.
Slashdot Mirror
> And does anyone remember when Slashdot pulled its Spider-Man 2 review because of plagiarism?
Plagiarism is unrelated.
Copyright has to do with permission to copy something. If you don't have permission to copy a copyrighted work (from the copyright holder) it is a copyright violation to do so. This is mitigated by Fair Use in many cases, but the principle remains.
Plagiarism is fraud. It is passing off someone else's work as your own. It may also be copyright violation, but it doesn't have to be. The two are orthogonal.
Telling point. I'm pretty sure it's the body of the engine itself that would contain the high velocity parts of the engine, and not the cowling, but you're probably right that a handgun round probably wouldn't penetrate to the blades. But it could easily damage the engine sufficiently to shut it down. There's lots of critical plumbing around the engine that doesn't have much protection.
Sorry, but explosive decompression or not, airplanes are fragile.
Flying pieces of metal inside an airplane is not a good idea. the engines are close by, and not protected. Ditto other essential systems, not the least the cockpit.
We have locking cockpit doors now. (So far the ONLY useful thing to come out of the TSA.) You want to take a step back and breach that protection?
Not so much Microsoft giving cash incentives, but all the ISVs that pay the manufacturer to install "trial versions" of their software on the machines. I guess that does include Microsoft if you count the trial versions of Office, etc.
It's the crapware (AKA bloatware) that gives you your discount. Such as it is. Linux doesn't have that going for it.
Yes.
They could be overturned.
Not easily, however. The litigation costs are high enough that it's cheaper to pay the protection racket. Multi-billion dollar corporations make decisions like this all the time -- if it's cheaper to cave to ridiculous claims than to fight them, then they'll roll right over. Even if they could win the fight.
And if the fight is in East Texas (like it commonly is) even poor quality patents are frequently upheld, so winning is up in the air no matter how strong the case against the patent holder.
So are cups, evidently.
Guess it depends where you were. I'm 56, and when I went to high school all I had available were chain stores. When I got to college, I'm not sure there were any chain stores in town -- all the record stores were local.
How do you loose a download?
If it's extraordinarily tight, perhaps you mean loosen?
I've had students ask to record lectures. I'm not sure how useful it is, but I always say yes.
When I was going to school, I'm not sure I heard some of the lectures, because I was always so busy copying the equations down. One physics professor had the left hand wall full before class started, and he worked his way around the front and the right hand wall over the course of the class. Sometimes he finished up on the left side again, eraser in one hand and chalk in the other...
Maybe a recorder would have been useful then, at that.
That's the same boat I'm in. I see all these elaborate schemes posted here -- multi-part keys where each relative has one portion of the key, etc. Is anyone actually *doing* this stuff? And realistically planning on keeping this up to date for the next 40 or 50 years (for those 20-somethings)?
If you're not doing it for your own use, then I think you're fooling yourself about having your scheme workable over the long term. Set it up so that it solves the unexpected death issue, sure, but it had better have immediate and practical utility or you'll let it lapse.
I'm on the second phone with this password database. I don't expect it will be the last. I don't keep this database for my heirs, I keep it for me. That means that I keep it up to date, and that I will move it to the next device when I replace the current one.
I don't know about anyone else, but if I'm making provision to make things easier for my heirs, I'll do it when I think about it -- which may not be that often. If I'm doing it for me but it has a side benefit for them, then it's going to be up to date and working.
True, if the phone is with me and is destroyed in my violent demise, my heirs may have a problem. Since my goal is to die in bed, many years from now, the violent demise is not really part of my planning.
I keep all my passwords on my phone in an encrypted database. The people that matter know my master password on that database, but they don't (currently) have physical access to my phone. That will change after I'm gone.
I agree. My Perl code looks a lot like C, since I was a C programmer when I picked up Perl. It's just the way I approach it. A lot of the Perl-ish syntax I find confusing, but I don't use most of it, so it's not much of a problem. For me, anyway.
Well...
That's *one* of the things it might stand for, depending on what mood you catch Larry Wall in when you ask him.
I'm with you there. I've always defined SciFi as "bad science fiction." By that definition "best SciFi" is an oxymoron.
As an earlier poster pointed out, much of the reason that SF and Fantasy are usually grouped together is that (especially in the early days) they were written by the same people. The author of _Tau Zero_ (hard SF) was also the author of _Operation Chaos_ (fantasy.) And at about the same time.
Both SF and Fantasy are about world building. This is obvious in both better SF and better fantasy. Authors that ignore this step (and there are many) may mimic the form of either SF or fantasy but generally produce forgettable work.
What's disappointing is that maker of the flow chart seems to think that "I am Legend" is a zombie book.
OK, I'll buy that the backend may have gotten better.
The UI has been degraded proportional to whatever improvements have been added to the back end. And the UI degradation happened first.
I'm still using Firefox mostly, mainly because the other options have been going downhill as well, but I'd call the net change negative.
Firefox improvements?
Gnome devs have never liked the "focus follows mouse" paradigm. After much strife, they finally condescended to include a flag buried in the Metacity code that would allow it (with embedded comments about how it was a bad idea.) For a long time, one of the advantages that I saw in running Gentoo was that I could actually edit that code and fix it, since I was going to be compiling it anyway.
Having to use gconf-editor to set the proper focus policy was an *improvement*!
The carbon fiber flywheels shred, so you don't get big chunks that would punch through an enclosure. You do need a strong enclosure though. Another posted cited shortage of titanium for the enclosures as being a reason these didn't catch on, which makes sense to me.
Traditional metal flywheels normally break into 3 asymmetric pieces, and no reasonable enclosure can handle that. The enclosures that I was reading about in the 70s had been successful at containing failures of the fiber flywheels.
In the late 90s I saw a flywheel option on a data center UPS that we were looking at. MGE Comet, I think. I've never seen that option since.
Yeah, counter-rotating flywheels would certainly eliminate the asymmetric gyroscopic effects and the other effects might actually include increased stability. I didn't know about the titanium shielding, but it makes sense.
But once we start talking about 10 hour charge times for batteries, 5-15 minutes might start sounding attractive. Fast charging a battery damages it over the long term, but the real limit to spinning up a flywheel is how fast you can deliver the power.
Oh, for a mod point.
In the 70s there was some speculation on flywheels for energy storage. High energy density, even higher power density (charge and discharge can be *very* fast) and some designs (called "superflywheels" and made with carbon fiber) were claimed to fail gracefully without big chunks breaking through their containment vessels. Not sure what ever happened to those plans.
You did have to engineer around some "interesting" gyroscopic effects if you planned to put them in a vehicle though.
He didn't say when it was he tried to do this. If it was, say 1978 or so (to pull a date out of a hat) would *you* have known where it was all supposed to go? I know *I* wouldn't have. I thought about building a kit computer back then but wasn't brave enough (or rich enough.)
It's not horrible on my Bionic. That would be a step up.
It freezes immediately. Can't even scroll around on the page. I've installed it a couple of times, hoping that the problem was a bad version, or corrupted, or something, but it just doesn't work here.
Despite my growing dissatisfaction with the desktop version, I still use it as my primary browser (mainly because I'm not thrilled with any of their competition either.) I was hoping that the constraints on a mobile device would moderate the Firefox devs' strange ideas on interface design, but it turns out it doesn't matter.