Actually, exile was more likely than death. Tribes didn't get around to killing people for offenses until they started to run out of places to exile them to.
That's not what patents were about. Patents were about the real, demonstratable fact that producing an idea and turning it into a finished product was an extremely expensive process in the 19th century. In many industries, this is still the case.
In order to foster innovation, companies needed protection; otherwise, it was a lot cheaper to let the other companies innovate and then copy them later.
Two things have changed in this regard: 1. Many ideas are now a lot cheaper to take to market than they used to be. This makes the cost of innovation a lot less, and thus the rewards (in the form of protection) should be less, in those areas (it's not true everywhere).
2. Companies have taken to a scattergun approach to patent laws. The idea has become to profit from the patent, not from the innovation. This is particularly bad.
How to solve this: Restore patents to a state where they only protect innovation, not litigation, and make them non-transferable; a company that's gone bankrupt anyway doesn't need protection, and with acquisitions it's easy to keep the old comapny alive to retain the patent right.
FWIW: Kerry "hid" his wife's earnings because they're his wife's, not his. He's not allowed to treat them as his own.
This is why he had to mortage his house to fund his nomination campaign; despite being married to a multi-billionaire, he couldn't accept any more than a few thousand dollars from her as a donation.
The results are _not_ the same. Classification is subject to internal review, is available to the Congressional oversight committees, and expires after a certain period of time. Revalation of classified material is a crime with severe penalties.
This, however, is a way to toss the images into a black box and not let them come out except when the DoD wants to trot out selected images of their own choice. Not being classified, they wouldn't be requried to show the pictures to Congress, nor would they _ever_ become available to the public.
In general, if the result of using an existing mechanism is "the same", and they won't use the said mechanism, then you can bet the results are NOT the same.
You are kidding, right? You realise that those oh-so-convenient values have come about because you use the imperial system?
In a metric world, your window will probably be either 135 or 140 cm, your hacksaw blade is probably 2 mm, and your tape measure comes with imperial units on the other side for when you work with older gear.
Which just says that they should have recounted in all counties, or at least in those counties that either candidate thought important.
However, denying recounts (espcially when the concerns were later shown to be justified) was a decision made by the Supreme Court, largely in response to a carefully targetted challenge by the Bush campaign.
As the old saying goes: it doesn't matter who you vote for, a politician still gets in.
1: Nudity. Pornography is legal in the United States, so long as it is not child pornography, and so long as it is not displayed in public (e.g. broadcast TV).
I find it extremely interesting that you (and the vast majority of posts I've seen so far) automatically equate nudity with pornography. Thus comes the belief that Michaelangelo's "David" (sans figleaf) is automatically obscene.
Sounds like a pretty big restriction on freedom of expression to me.
As opposed to someone using the federal court system to impose an change in election rules to game the outcome of a Presidential election? The change being that you're actually meant to count the votes correctly (remember: the 'Time'-sponsored recount showed Gore won those counties in Florida after all)
Note that the power can be lost without the title. Arguably, the Japanese royal family is an unbroken dynasty stretching back thousands of years. However, they have been largely ceremonial that entire time.
It's the modularised part; a moduler web browser should be extensible without needing to embed controls directly into the browser itself.
Thus, a browser could be built to use these external software components that render content in-place in the browser window.
Because these software components can be simply "plugged in" to the browser, we will call them "plugins".
External vendors can then write "plugins" for new formats that hadn't be deemed suitable to put into the core of the browser. These formats could include things like Flash.
Well, you could try downloading the IBM JDK, where they explicitly state in the web pages describing it that it's a clean-room implementation, and the absence of any references to Sun except for the trademark acknowledgement in the license.
The only imposition that Sun place on Java implementations is that to actively brand something as Java-compatible, you need to pass their certification suite.
They can't or else they already would have done so. IBM's JVM is based on Sun's code and thus they have no rights to open source it. What IBM (and others) can/should do is financially support the Kaffe and GNU ClassPath projects, which are clean-room Java implementations written by people who have never been tainted by exposure to Sun's "community source" licensed JDK code.
IBM have implemented their own clean-room JVM as of version 1.3. No connection back to Sun at all.
Is there a 'standard' for the Java language itself, in the same way that there is for "C#"?
Why, yes there is, as a matter of fact. Every aspect of the Java language, including its libraries, are completely specified, and community participation is welcomed under the Java Community Process.
I must admit that I can't see any standard for the.NET libraries that make C# a semi-useful language anywhere.
Yes, the standardisation of C++ is why it's so easy to write code that cleanly compiles under GCC, the Intel C++ compiler, and Microsoft's Visual Studio C++, for Linux, Solaris, MacOS 9 and 10, and the various Windows strains.
And the lack of a standard for Java is what is stopping me from transparently plugging IBM's Jikes into my build script, or the Kaffe compiler, or gcj.
Silly me. If that's the case, let me make it very clear that I'm choosing my words carefully: I'm fucking glad that Sun doesn't submit Java to a standards body that doesn't have any teeth.
As for C# and the ECMA submission: don't make me laugh. Sure, the syntax has been submitted, but bugger all of the runtime or libraries.
Personally, I'd take Sun's open Java Community Process, along with their vigourous defence of the Java brand and willingness to take on those who would attempt to fracture it, over the ECMA's stewardship of C# any day.
Because Sun controlled Java, they could go after Microsoft in the court and shut their JVM down, as they did.
If Java was controlled by a standards body, Sun couldn't do that. It would be dependant on the standards body to do it instead. And looking at the C++ standards committe, we can have a good idea how successful that would be. Heck, look at how great the W3C's attempts to get Microsoft to comply to the HTTP, HTML and CSS standards are working.
Sun was in the process of handing control of Java to a standards body. The decision of Microsoft to implement a non-compatible version showed them why it would have been a bad idea.
Again, IBM manages it. Apple manages it. HP manages it. Sun spend a lot of time debating changes in an open forum, so it's not like any changes should be a surprise. Furthermore, this is exactly what the GNU Classpath project is doing.
Heck, seeing as how IBM is one of the guys asking for Sun to opensource Java, why don't they open up their clean-room implementation?
Slashdot Mirror
Yeah, and so was a 20-year jail term for a long period of time, too... however, it's not the same as a death sentence, either in fact or in ethics.
Actually, exile was more likely than death. Tribes didn't get around to killing people for offenses until they started to run out of places to exile them to.
That's not what patents were about. Patents were about the real, demonstratable fact that producing an idea and turning it into a finished product was an extremely expensive process in the 19th century. In many industries, this is still the case.
In order to foster innovation, companies needed protection; otherwise, it was a lot cheaper to let the other companies innovate and then copy them later.
Two things have changed in this regard:
1. Many ideas are now a lot cheaper to take to market than they used to be. This makes the cost of innovation a lot less, and thus the rewards (in the form of protection) should be less, in those areas (it's not true everywhere).
2. Companies have taken to a scattergun approach to patent laws. The idea has become to profit from the patent, not from the innovation. This is particularly bad.
How to solve this: Restore patents to a state where they only protect innovation, not litigation, and make them non-transferable; a company that's gone bankrupt anyway doesn't need protection, and with acquisitions it's easy to keep the old comapny alive to retain the patent right.
FWIW: Kerry "hid" his wife's earnings because they're his wife's, not his. He's not allowed to treat them as his own.
This is why he had to mortage his house to fund his nomination campaign; despite being married to a multi-billionaire, he couldn't accept any more than a few thousand dollars from her as a donation.
They should go and classify it anyway.
The results are _not_ the same. Classification is subject to internal review, is available to the Congressional oversight committees, and expires after a certain period of time. Revalation of classified material is a crime with severe penalties.
This, however, is a way to toss the images into a black box and not let them come out except when the DoD wants to trot out selected images of their own choice. Not being classified, they wouldn't be requried to show the pictures to Congress, nor would they _ever_ become available to the public.
In general, if the result of using an existing mechanism is "the same", and they won't use the said mechanism, then you can bet the results are NOT the same.
But classified material is already exempt until the classification expires. What more do they need?
What this is saying is "We have a bunch of pictures that aren't classified in any way, but we won't let you see them".
If there's a problem with the classification rules, then change _those_.
The answer, then, is to assess each student to see if they need the course. This should be available for all courses.
A simple method would be to give the end-of-year exam at the start; if you pass by a large enough margin, you don't have to do it.
Murder imlpies intent; manslaughter implies negligenece. That's the difference.
Well, a few years ago, this would have been good, but more and more spammers seme to be shifting to using zombie PCs instead.
You are kidding, right? You realise that those oh-so-convenient values have come about because you use the imperial system?
In a metric world, your window will probably be either 135 or 140 cm, your hacksaw blade is probably 2 mm, and your tape measure comes with imperial units on the other side for when you work with older gear.
Which just says that they should have recounted in all counties, or at least in those counties that either candidate thought important.
However, denying recounts (espcially when the concerns were later shown to be justified) was a decision made by the Supreme Court, largely in response to a carefully targetted challenge by the Bush campaign.
As the old saying goes: it doesn't matter who you vote for, a politician still gets in.
I find it extremely interesting that you (and the vast majority of posts I've seen so far) automatically equate nudity with pornography. Thus comes the belief that Michaelangelo's "David" (sans figleaf) is automatically obscene.
Sounds like a pretty big restriction on freedom of expression to me.
As opposed to someone using the federal court system to impose an change in election rules to game the outcome of a Presidential election? The change being that you're actually meant to count the votes correctly (remember: the 'Time'-sponsored recount showed Gore won those counties in Florida after all)
Just curious.
Note that the power can be lost without the title. Arguably, the Japanese royal family is an unbroken dynasty stretching back thousands of years. However, they have been largely ceremonial that entire time.
It's the modularised part; a moduler web browser should be extensible without needing to embed controls directly into the browser itself.
Thus, a browser could be built to use these external software components that render content in-place in the browser window.
Because these software components can be simply "plugged in" to the browser, we will call them "plugins".
External vendors can then write "plugins" for new formats that hadn't be deemed suitable to put into the core of the browser. These formats could include things like Flash.
Oh, wait a second...
Well, you could try downloading the IBM JDK, where they explicitly state in the web pages describing it that it's a clean-room implementation, and the absence of any references to Sun except for the trademark acknowledgement in the license.
The only imposition that Sun place on Java implementations is that to actively brand something as Java-compatible, you need to pass their certification suite.
IBM have implemented their own clean-room JVM as of version 1.3. No connection back to Sun at all.
Why, yes there is, as a matter of fact. Every aspect of the Java language, including its libraries, are completely specified, and community participation is welcomed under the Java Community Process.
I must admit that I can't see any standard for the
Yes, the standardisation of C++ is why it's so easy to write code that cleanly compiles under GCC, the Intel C++ compiler, and Microsoft's Visual Studio C++, for Linux, Solaris, MacOS 9 and 10, and the various Windows strains.
And the lack of a standard for Java is what is stopping me from transparently plugging IBM's Jikes into my build script, or the Kaffe compiler, or gcj.
Silly me. If that's the case, let me make it very clear that I'm choosing my words carefully: I'm fucking glad that Sun doesn't submit Java to a standards body that doesn't have any teeth.
As for C# and the ECMA submission: don't make me laugh. Sure, the syntax has been submitted, but bugger all of the runtime or libraries.
Personally, I'd take Sun's open Java Community Process, along with their vigourous defence of the Java brand and willingness to take on those who would attempt to fracture it, over the ECMA's stewardship of C# any day.
Java has standards sponsored in an open forum. Is that not open as well?
This is Slashdot. Of course I hadn't read their proposal. :)
Still, the lack of input from Sun shouldn't be an obstacle to IBM doing it anyway.
Because Sun controlled Java, they could go after Microsoft in the court and shut their JVM down, as they did.
If Java was controlled by a standards body, Sun couldn't do that. It would be dependant on the standards body to do it instead. And looking at the C++ standards committe, we can have a good idea how successful that would be. Heck, look at how great the W3C's attempts to get Microsoft to comply to the HTTP, HTML and CSS standards are working.
Sun was in the process of handing control of Java to a standards body. The decision of Microsoft to implement a non-compatible version showed them why it would have been a bad idea.
That would be the Swing classes, most likely. Set it to use the native Aqua Look & Feel classes that come with the 1.4 JDK from Apple.
Again, IBM manages it. Apple manages it. HP manages it. Sun spend a lot of time debating changes in an open forum, so it's not like any changes should be a surprise. Furthermore, this is exactly what the GNU Classpath project is doing.
Heck, seeing as how IBM is one of the guys asking for Sun to opensource Java, why don't they open up their clean-room implementation?
So re-implement it, the way IBM did.