One difference in styling between Whistler and Longhorn is analogous to one between Jaguar and Panther: less candyish (less than Luna, I mean). The colors are more subdued. I guess maybe the way-out styling was a bit too much in both cases?
You asked whether the editors or Georgy chose the questions, though. That's why I said to read the faq: it makes it pretty clear that the editors choose the questions. Let's face it: don't go to/. for your political news, that's not what they're here for (except maybe YRO).
My question was moderated to +5 -- how come it didn't get passed along for an answer?
We typically get 30 or 40 questions moderated +5, and since we only send 10 to our interview guests, not all highly-moderated questions will get asked.
Hey, that Eleventh question wasn't even one of the highly moderated ones!
The editor who makes the final selection isn't required to select questions based soley upon their score. We use those scores as a guideline, but not a set-in-stone rule.
Children can't vote. Felons can't vote. Illegal immigrants can't vote. Unregistered people can't vote. That's a lot of the population that isn't able to legitimately sign.
Which explains why half the signatures of any petition are likely to be illegitimate.
To paint this as some sort of republican vendetta is absolutely idiotic, and if this guy doesn't understand that when he's actually running, then obviously he's too stupid to be governor.
And if you think this is a he, you're obviously too stupid to vote.
PS: I'm not talking about corporate authorship here, which is an absolute term (don't remember how long, 100 years), and that would likely be the correct category here, since the System V code was probably work-for-hire. But again, IANAL.
Anything under copyright as of 1978 was grandfathered in both times the copyright was extended (under the original Berne Convention extensions and under the later Bono Act ones). And the copyright law before that allowed an original term plus an extension that came out to 75 years. I don't remember what the original term was, but it was around 35 years, so one can be certain that anything published after ~1943 is under copyright, and most things published after 1928 are under copyright.
But I am not a lawyer. So I can't provide an authoritative answer, and the truth might vary from my perceptions. But that's the way, as a layman, I read the law, and I've done some stuff with copyright clearance with publications, so I'd be surprised to be wrong.
Your suggestion #2 looks more an more plausible every minute.
Another interesting point to remember: Apple's memory is famously expensive. A lot of buyers will only buy the minimum memory from Apple, and buy the rest from a 3rd party supplier.
The studios are relying on the fact that they'll get at least good sales on opening night even for a bad movie, as long as the marketing campaign makes it look good. Instead, the first viewers are warning their friends on Thursday and Friday nights "naw, go see something else, Gigli stinks."
The Thursday/Friday night opening night crowds used to be a captive market.
It seems never to have occurred to them that some people might be texting to say "you have to see this movie!" for movies that didn't get the full court marketing press? And that the whole thing just cancels out (well, it would if there were as many surprise good movies as there are expensive bad movies).
Grassroots word of mouth is without a doubt the best marketing tool any product can have. If the word of mouth is against you, it's because you don't have good product.
They were encouraging others to use threats and extortion. On the face of it, that's criminal conspiracy. You obviously have an agenda wrt to abortion. You aren't arguing with a brick (indirect object), but perhaps the protesters were (agent).
CHICAGO -- A jury here has found that leading antiabortion groups violated federal racketeering laws, designed to prosecute mobsters, by directing protesters to use extortion and threats of violence in attempts to shut down two abortion clinics, the Washington Post reports.
Extortion and threats of violence are not protected speech, though. If your point is that they only support protected speech, you're right. If your point is that they only support the left, you're wrong.
Are there any other cataclysmic events in the offing?
One fear is that the entire West Antarctic and Greenland ice sheets might disappear into the oceans raising sea levels by seven metres or more. Even the most pessimistic experts say this is only a worry if the world warms by about 4 C, which is outside the range of mainstream predictions for the next century. And a glacial collapse is such a slow process it would take several hundred years for all the ice to slide into the sea.
So yes, if the world warms up enough, the ocean levels WILL rise.
Karl Popper must have been quite a man to have, 100 years ago, predicted the World Wide Web and virtual societies like EverQuest and Ultima Online. Richard Bartle's argument that theories have to be disprovable needs to take a step back -
Karl Popper set forth the basic intellectual framework for modern scientific inquiry - what distinguishes scientific theory from non-scientific inquiry. Popper argued that a theory is an argument based upon observations that makes predictions which can be tested and which may thereby be disproven. Unless an author is able to directly grapple with Popper's arguments, that author has no justification ignoring them.
PS: I don't remember if the Ring poem is in Tengwar or Cirth. So don't shoot me if I'm mistaken. And the whole point of my argument is that 16 bits is not enough. I don't know if DVDEUG agrees or disagrees with that point; I wouldn't be too worried about encoding Tengwar or Cirth (of all the ficitonal scripts), but I would be worried about the curtailment of the higher planes of the Unicode standard.
We should deal with non-ficitonal languages before fictional ones. Once those non-fictional languages for which our understanding is in a state that can support Unicode are done, and we have some idea of the scope of room that will be necessary for the encoding of the remaining current repertoire
Tengwar has thousands of users, and quite possible more then cuniform. Do scholars of twenth century literature and sociology matter less then scholars of Babylon?
If one were to provide a list of ten names of scholars working in an academic environment on languages written in Tengwar (not just on Tolkien, but on his languages) - I know there are some, indeed I'm thinking of picking up the book "Tolkien's Languages"); and provide a list of three literary works not by J.R.R. Tolkien in a Tengwar language (or point to two literary works by Tolkien in Tengwar languages beyond the Ring poem itself), I'd say no, they probably aren't. But at the moment, the corpus of literary, scientific, historical, and commercial significance is entirely the work of one man, and so it remains effectively an idiolect. Other users of the language are either Tolkien scholars or Tolkien readers using the language in the context of Tolkien's work. So I doubt that sharing of large corpora across disciplines and user communities, and the other things that a non-PUA encoding would be used for, are currently necessary to the user community.
There are more Chinese characters encoded in Unicode then every other script combined. They've got their fair share.
Let's say that a Chinese writer is born who is at least as important as Tolkien. In his works, he uses unencoded (new or not) standard Chinese characters. Are you saying that it is more important to get Tolkien's fictional scripts, which are not the actual medium of his literary work, but are in fact part of the "message" of his literary work, encoded than it would be to get the new characters from the hypothetical Chinese writer, which as postulated WOULD BE part of the actual medium of his work, encoded?
By the way, I believe you're mischaracterizing the arguments against the hieroglyphic encodings: they tend to be "we don't understand the repertoire well enough" or "we don't agree that the proposed repertoire properly represents the script," not "hieroglyphics should never be encoded in Unicode." Here's the relevant paragraph of the objection:
At the present stage of research in Egyptian hieroplyphic script, one always has to expect new
characters and changes in what we currently perceive to be an abstract character. This means
that the clumsy instrument of standardization cannot meet the demands of the incomplete stage
of research in Egyptology. A far more appropriate means would be fonts registered by
Egyptologists, which can be very quickly expanded and modified within the science itself, as is
the case with the directories of the Standard and the Extended Library that Hans van den Berg,
Utrecht, is running within the framework of the program for printing hieroglyphs Glyph
(please note the name). Only after the repertoires will have stabilized within Egyptology itself,
further steps can be sensible.
Slashdot Mirror
One difference in styling between Whistler and Longhorn is analogous to one between Jaguar and Panther: less candyish (less than Luna, I mean). The colors are more subdued. I guess maybe the way-out styling was a bit too much in both cases?
Obviously you didn't try right clicking on the dock (ctrl-clicking), as that is indeed where the setting is located.
If it works on Linux too, I'm hooked. I SO want something at least as good as MSFS2K2 for Linux and OS X. Please say it at least works on Wine.
Yes, this was one of the weaker interviews.
Or maybe Cox could have 2.4, whoever's the maintainer on 2.4 could take 2.6, and Torvalds could start on 2.7.
You asked whether the editors or Georgy chose the questions, though. That's why I said to read the faq: it makes it pretty clear that the editors choose the questions. Let's face it: don't go to /. for your political news, that's not what they're here for (except maybe YRO).
RTFFAQ.
My question was moderated to +5 -- how come it didn't get passed along for an answer?
We typically get 30 or 40 questions moderated +5, and since we only send 10 to our interview guests, not all highly-moderated questions will get asked.
Hey, that Eleventh question wasn't even one of the highly moderated ones!
The editor who makes the final selection isn't required to select questions based soley upon their score. We use those scores as a guideline, but not a set-in-stone rule.
Children can't vote. Felons can't vote. Illegal immigrants can't vote. Unregistered people can't vote. That's a lot of the population that isn't able to legitimately sign.
Which explains why half the signatures of any petition are likely to be illegitimate.
To paint this as some sort of republican vendetta is absolutely idiotic, and if this guy doesn't understand that when he's actually running, then obviously he's too stupid to be governor.
And if you think this is a he, you're obviously too stupid to vote.
I think it's time that Linux users and developers started a class action against SCO for defamation and for violation of the GPL.
PS: I'm not talking about corporate authorship here, which is an absolute term (don't remember how long, 100 years), and that would likely be the correct category here, since the System V code was probably work-for-hire. But again, IANAL.
Anything under copyright as of 1978 was grandfathered in both times the copyright was extended (under the original Berne Convention extensions and under the later Bono Act ones). And the copyright law before that allowed an original term plus an extension that came out to 75 years. I don't remember what the original term was, but it was around 35 years, so one can be certain that anything published after ~1943 is under copyright, and most things published after 1928 are under copyright.
But I am not a lawyer. So I can't provide an authoritative answer, and the truth might vary from my perceptions. But that's the way, as a layman, I read the law, and I've done some stuff with copyright clearance with publications, so I'd be surprised to be wrong.
Your suggestion #2 looks more an more plausible every minute.
Excellent point, SparkyTWP. I was trying to think of a movie that fit that model, but I haven't seen MBFGW yet.
Another interesting point to remember: Apple's memory is famously expensive. A lot of buyers will only buy the minimum memory from Apple, and buy the rest from a 3rd party supplier.
The studios are relying on the fact that they'll get at least good sales on opening night even for a bad movie, as long as the marketing campaign makes it look good. Instead, the first viewers are warning their friends on Thursday and Friday nights "naw, go see something else, Gigli stinks." The Thursday/Friday night opening night crowds used to be a captive market.
It seems never to have occurred to them that some people might be texting to say "you have to see this movie!" for movies that didn't get the full court marketing press? And that the whole thing just cancels out (well, it would if there were as many surprise good movies as there are expensive bad movies).
Grassroots word of mouth is without a doubt the best marketing tool any product can have. If the word of mouth is against you, it's because you don't have good product.
Copyright is life + 70 years, with a few exceptions.
They were encouraging others to use threats and extortion. On the face of it, that's criminal conspiracy. You obviously have an agenda wrt to abortion. You aren't arguing with a brick (indirect object), but perhaps the protesters were (agent).
CHICAGO -- A jury here has found that leading antiabortion groups violated federal racketeering laws, designed to prosecute mobsters, by directing protesters to use extortion and threats of violence in attempts to shut down two abortion clinics, the Washington Post reports.
Extortion and threats of violence are not protected speech, though. If your point is that they only support protected speech, you're right. If your point is that they only support the left, you're wrong.
Have you SEEN the ratings for CNN's 9/11 coverage?
It looks like its the Niagara-Mohawk network, and not the New England National Grid network, that's affected. Things are fine in Andover.
From your own New Scientist link:
Are there any other cataclysmic events in the offing?
One fear is that the entire West Antarctic and Greenland ice sheets might disappear into the oceans raising sea levels by seven metres or more. Even the most pessimistic experts say this is only a worry if the world warms by about 4 C, which is outside the range of mainstream predictions for the next century. And a glacial collapse is such a slow process it would take several hundred years for all the ice to slide into the sea.
So yes, if the world warms up enough, the ocean levels WILL rise.
Excellent posting, Godeke.
Karl Popper must have been quite a man to have, 100 years ago, predicted the World Wide Web and virtual societies like EverQuest and Ultima Online. Richard Bartle's argument that theories have to be disprovable needs to take a step back -
Karl Popper set forth the basic intellectual framework for modern scientific inquiry - what distinguishes scientific theory from non-scientific inquiry. Popper argued that a theory is an argument based upon observations that makes predictions which can be tested and which may thereby be disproven. Unless an author is able to directly grapple with Popper's arguments, that author has no justification ignoring them.
I believe it [the IBM anti-trust case] was settled by Nixon appointees early in the Carter administration. "ran out of money" is of course facetious
Don't remember the Carter years too well, do you? "Ran out of money" isn't that bad an exaggeration!
:-) Couldn't help it
PS: I don't remember if the Ring poem is in Tengwar or Cirth. So don't shoot me if I'm mistaken. And the whole point of my argument is that 16 bits is not enough. I don't know if DVDEUG agrees or disagrees with that point; I wouldn't be too worried about encoding Tengwar or Cirth (of all the ficitonal scripts), but I would be worried about the curtailment of the higher planes of the Unicode standard.
Tengwar has thousands of users, and quite possible more then cuniform. Do scholars of twenth century literature and sociology matter less then scholars of Babylon?
If one were to provide a list of ten names of scholars working in an academic environment on languages written in Tengwar (not just on Tolkien, but on his languages) - I know there are some, indeed I'm thinking of picking up the book "Tolkien's Languages"); and provide a list of three literary works not by J.R.R. Tolkien in a Tengwar language (or point to two literary works by Tolkien in Tengwar languages beyond the Ring poem itself), I'd say no, they probably aren't. But at the moment, the corpus of literary, scientific, historical, and commercial significance is entirely the work of one man, and so it remains effectively an idiolect. Other users of the language are either Tolkien scholars or Tolkien readers using the language in the context of Tolkien's work. So I doubt that sharing of large corpora across disciplines and user communities, and the other things that a non-PUA encoding would be used for, are currently necessary to the user community.
There are more Chinese characters encoded in Unicode then every other script combined. They've got their fair share.
Let's say that a Chinese writer is born who is at least as important as Tolkien. In his works, he uses unencoded (new or not) standard Chinese characters. Are you saying that it is more important to get Tolkien's fictional scripts, which are not the actual medium of his literary work, but are in fact part of the "message" of his literary work, encoded than it would be to get the new characters from the hypothetical Chinese writer, which as postulated WOULD BE part of the actual medium of his work, encoded?
By the way, I believe you're mischaracterizing the arguments against the hieroglyphic encodings: they tend to be "we don't understand the repertoire well enough" or "we don't agree that the proposed repertoire properly represents the script," not "hieroglyphics should never be encoded in Unicode." Here's the relevant paragraph of the objection:
At the present stage of research in Egyptian hieroplyphic script, one always has to expect new characters and changes in what we currently perceive to be an abstract character. This means that the clumsy instrument of standardization cannot meet the demands of the incomplete stage of research in Egyptology. A far more appropriate means would be fonts registered by Egyptologists, which can be very quickly expanded and modified within the science itself, as is the case with the directories of the Standard and the Extended Library that Hans van den Berg, Utrecht, is running within the framework of the program for printing hieroglyphs Glyph (please note the name). Only after the repertoires will have stabilized within Egyptology itself, further steps can be sensible.