The EU is currently considering a proposal that will prohibit health-related food advertisements until prove (see here) . The only question is: What counts as proof?;)
...in an attempt, we believe, primarily to slow the inevitable acceptance of Linux. Linux is a disruptive technology, troubling to many, puzzling to some, potentially freeing to all.
Hm...am I the only one to think these remarks are a little over the top?
Don't get me wrong -- Linux is a good system, and through its intimate connection with the concept of open source, it has merits beyond its technological quality. But they could spend their time better than issuing such bold claims (maybe they've got a politics student as intern in the press dept.?;) )
SCO has already been halted in Germany and we applaud Red Hat's actions to help end their activities in the US -- and beyond.
Well, the case has been suspended in Germany, but only for at most six months. It's not over yet...
This study investigated the ease of everyday use -- application programs, emails, etc, and Linux is about as good as windows. Fine:)
However, as we probably all know, life is on some, but important, occasions more than *using* programs.
If you buy a new piece of hardware, you get a CD with device drivers for windows. Put it in the drive, install, it works (most of the time).
That's something most Linux distributions don't offer as comfortably.
If their Windows doesn't work, most people know how to "fix" it themselves: fiddle around with tab buttons, re-install program, re-install windows. I couldn't imagine most of the Windows users I know correcting the.XF86Setup after apt-get upgrade has messed it up;).
The point I'm trying to make is that for everything beyong everyday usage, linux presupposes more knowledge about and interest in operating system internals that windows does. That's not necessarily a bad thing, just something one has to be aware of.
There's no chance (or risk) statistical translation
can put human translators out of business for quite a long time to come.
The main point is that because these programs completely lack word knowledge, they must try to "understand" the sentences on a purely structural level. This works for
restricted domains (subject matters)
restricted range of grammatical constructions
restricted genre (style)
restricted range of cultural presuppositions
In other words, it works best for technical manuals;).
> Modern languages tend to have less inflected
> grammars than older languages.
In general, that's not true. There is development in
both directions, depending on the language family.
Proto Indo European started out with many cases, and that's why there is a tendency towards less inflections and more particles. In languages with many particles, the development can be inversed. Cliticization is such a process. For example, in some dialects of German, personal pronouns become new verb endings:
Laufen Sie! (run!) -> Laufen'S!
Short and simplified version: Look out for different
typically co-occurring words and cluster them. For "pissed", you'll find
Cluster 1: {pissed, toilet}
Cluster 2: {pissed, booze, get}
and probably some more
These clusters correspond to different meanings of the word. Then determine which of these clusters fits the current usage.
The procedure throws away all code pieces
which occur more than once in the same version
of the code. Okay, most of them will be
trivial, but there might be some that aren't.
These pieces aren't compared to the other
version of the code. Might be an idea to use
a frequency threshold instead.
During comparison of the two versions, all code
pieces with the same checksum are disregarded.
But different checksum does not mean different
code! MD5 are computed on string level - let
there be an additional comment, or a linebreak,
and you won't get a match. Some simple
operation to bring the code into a kind of
canonical formatting can take care of that.
If you don't do that, you run the risk of losing some correspondences, I'm afraid.
It's not only links in the Internet that are distributed according to a power law, it`s rather a pattern that turns up in many domains. One example is Zipf's law for all kinds of linguistic data, and...much more, although I can't think of an example at the moment;-)
I wonder if there will even be a time when people will be able to discuss developments in germany without reference to the nazis. this is 2002 after all, or is my watch wrong?
Slashdot Mirror
Hasta la vista, IBM?
The EU is currently considering a proposal that will prohibit health-related food advertisements until prove (see here) . The only question is: What counts as proof? ;)
Ever heard about the Northern Appalachian Seismic Zone?
It's just not as densely populated as California.
Now you will at least be able to know that your priority parcel has been stuck in Nowhere, IA for the last four days.
It's not the Red Sea, it's the Lake of Gennesaret.
;)
The Rea Sea was the one where the surface tension didn't hold up to the weight of the Egyptian Army
Just my E0.02.
Hm...am I the only one to think these remarks are a little over the top?
Don't get me wrong -- Linux is a good system, and through its intimate connection with the concept of open source, it has merits beyond its technological quality. But they could spend their time better than issuing such bold claims (maybe they've got a politics student as intern in the press dept.?
SCO has already been halted in Germany and we applaud Red Hat's actions to help end their activities in the US -- and beyond.
Well, the case has been suspended in Germany, but only for at most six months. It's not over yet...
However, as we probably all know, life is on some, but important, occasions more than *using* programs.
- If you buy a new piece of hardware, you get a CD with device drivers for windows. Put it in the drive, install, it works (most of the time).
That's something most Linux distributions don't offer as comfortably.
- If their Windows doesn't work, most people know how to "fix" it themselves: fiddle around with tab buttons, re-install program, re-install windows. I couldn't imagine most of the Windows users I know correcting the
.XF86Setup after apt-get upgrade has messed it up ;).
The point I'm trying to make is that for everything beyong everyday usage, linux presupposes more knowledge about and interest in operating system internals that windows does. That's not necessarily a bad thing, just something one has to be aware of.- restricted domains (subject matters)
- restricted range of grammatical constructions
- restricted genre (style)
- restricted range of cultural presuppositions
In other words, it works best for technical manuals> Modern languages tend to have less inflected > grammars than older languages. In general, that's not true. There is development in both directions, depending on the language family. Proto Indo European started out with many cases, and that's why there is a tendency towards less inflections and more particles. In languages with many particles, the development can be inversed. Cliticization is such a process. For example, in some dialects of German, personal pronouns become new verb endings: Laufen Sie! (run!) -> Laufen'S!
Short and simplified version: Look out for different typically co-occurring words and cluster them. For "pissed", you'll find Cluster 1: {pissed, toilet} Cluster 2: {pissed, booze, get} and probably some more These clusters correspond to different meanings of the word. Then determine which of these clusters fits the current usage.
- The procedure throws away all code pieces
which occur more than once in the same version
of the code. Okay, most of them will be
trivial, but there might be some that aren't.
These pieces aren't compared to the other
version of the code. Might be an idea to use
a frequency threshold instead.
- During comparison of the two versions, all code
pieces with the same checksum are disregarded.
But different checksum does not mean different
code! MD5 are computed on string level - let
there be an additional comment, or a linebreak,
and you won't get a match. Some simple
operation to bring the code into a kind of
canonical formatting can take care of that.
If you don't do that, you run the risk of losing some correspondences, I'm afraid.It's not only links in the Internet that are distributed according to a power law, it`s rather a pattern that turns up in many domains. One example is Zipf's law for all kinds of linguistic data, and...much more, although I can't think of an example at the moment ;-)
I wonder if there will even be a time when people will be able to discuss developments in germany without reference to the nazis. this is 2002 after all, or is my watch wrong?