So it sounds to me like a more sensible solution would be to start having inspections, and use the revenue from the inspections to prop up the gas taxes. That way you're helping the environment, too.
Noone knows yet what machines the 970 (the new IBM chip expected to replace the Motorola G4) will be used in first. There's been some speculation that all G4s will be replaced by 970s at the same time because the 970s are cheaper, other speculation that the PowerMacs would be the first, followed by PowerBooks then by iMacs, and yet other speculation that it would be PowerBooks first.
The parent posting made it clear it was talking about commodity hardware, not an Apple-proprietary x86 architecture. There is no reason to believe that an Apple-proprietary x86 architecture would be any cheaper than the 970-based architecture we are likely to get.
Now, why doesn't Apple make OSX for x86 machines ?
I know I shouldn't feed the trolls, but everyone, repeat after me:
Because Apple is a hardware company!
Selling OS X for x86 machines would cut into their margins, encourage their competitors, and there's simply no way they could survive as an OS-only vendor (remember BeOS? That was a lot better than Windows, too).
Can IBM afford to buy ...
on
Today's SCO News
·
· Score: 2, Interesting
Novell? I mean, it sounds like the safest bet here. Imagine IBM+Novell. Then just find some excuse to kill SCO's license, misrepresentation maybe. (IANAL, though, so who knows if this is possible).
Think of the four or five books that are most like what you've written. Look up the authors' names in Who's Who or Contemporary Authors to find out the names of their agents. Research the agents to find out if they're likely to want to represent other stuff.
Send them no more than about 20 pages, a chapter or two, with an outline of the whole and a promise to send the whole if they request it, which will make it look far less intimidating on the slush pile. Choose what you send carefully: it should be the part of the book that would be most likely to entice a read to turn to the next chapter, but should be easy enough to understand and read on its own (it shouldn't be too hard to get into). Remember that the reader is likely to toss it down within the first few paragraphs if it's not interesting, and that the reader almost certainly will not be technically oriented.
It will be on the slush pile; unless you've published short stories or done tv scripts or something that has already brought you to the attention of an editor or agent, that's where it goes, waiting for an editorial assistant or agent's assistant to get to it when they have spare time (which is why sending a smaller package is so important - it will look like something that can be knocked off in a few minutes. That's also why it's so important for it to be immediately engaging: if it's not, the EA/agent's assistant [not sure what they call these in agent's offices] will just toss it aside to be returned).
Finally, have patience. You probably won't get it published, and if you do, it probably will take a long time to find a buyer. Very few books get snapped up by the first agent or publisher who reads it.
The website is accessible once again. Time to/. BTW, anyone else feel that the only thing the Raelians are missing is the black clothes and the tennis shoes???
Thousands of people have been calling a phone number asking for God because they saw the phone number on Jim Carrey's pager in a movie over the weekend. Someone has to protect the rest of us from the stupid majority.
By nature electronic formats are volatile. When you put it on a CD (what do you mean by "unencrypted?" Only that you don't need the DRM authentication that AAC needs?) you're changing formats. And correct me if I'm wrong, but an original CD is of higher quality than an AAC burned one.
Note that I'm not knocking iTMS, I just think the argument against it in favor of subscription services isn't as strong as it appears.
But the mass conserved from the virtual particles is the mass that fell into the hole, right? I mean, if a hole existed by itself in the universe, with no external mass, it would still evaporate via Hawking radiation?
Actually, it is a news organization associated withis a small religious group known as "Christian Science" (offically "The Church of Christ, Scientist"), which has very little in common with Christianity.
Well, right up to that last part. Christian Scientists are Christians; after all, they believe in the resurrection of Jesus. That ultimately is what sets "Christians" apart from "non-Christians." They also consider the Bible to be canonical, they simply have in addition a book - almost a commentary - called Science and Health, with Key to the Scriptures that defines how their doctrine relates to the Bible.
If the Christian Scientists had been around in the 4th or 5th centuries, they might have been considered heretics by the Orthodox Christians and Catholics. But they would be considered Christians by all except the tiny minority of evangelicals who deny that even Catholics are "Christians" because they do not share their doctrinal views.
IANAP. Doesn't Hawking Radiation result from quantum tunneling, i.e., the stuff INSIDE the whole (that got there before it was wrapped up in the r(Schwarzchild)) starts to leak out due to virtual pair production? Or am I a couple of decades behind the times?
Make sure the damned thing has an electric charge. Use electromagnetic repulsion to keep it bottled up. IANAP, but I seem to remember that this question is old hat.
I read the original Lancet letter. It's the thinnest piece of reasoning I've ever seen published in a scholarly journal. The guy is apparently some kind of viruses-from-space kook, who believes that the fact that he's found microbes 40 km up means they're coming from space.
Pay $300 for your operating system on CD, so you can reinstall at any time if necessary, or pay $120 a year for a subscription to an operating system that will expire in a year, then HAVE to pay $150 the next year to keep it for another year. Because that's the same model. And who would buy 7500 songs in a *volatile* format anyway? That is about double the size of my CD collection, which cost me $3200 or so (over 18 years). iTunes works precisely because buying a song is an impulse thing, and is particularly useful for stuff that you like but not enough to by the CD: buying 1 song for $1 is a lot better than buying 1 song and 14 bits of static for $15.
And I also don't think it's up to them to scan every line of code, on the off chance that somehow their code got in there...
Actually, I think it is (IANAL). Whenever we release information to the public, it has to go through clearance to resolve any IP risks. Same should be true of SCO. They should have double-checked that none of their IP sneaked into the kernel. Otherwise how can they prove that the IP didn't get in their due to the actions of a SCO employee working under SCO's orders?
How can anyone OUTSIDE SCO verify their claims, if they've released their own versions of the code under the GPL with their IP in it? How can anyone be sure it isn't some kind of legal mulligan? "Oh, we decided we didn't like GPLing that code after all, but since we've got to deal with the fact that it's in there, we'll just say we didn't put it in, someone else did."
I'm not saying this is what they're doing, I'm saying this is one possible interpretation of the situation that I can think of that may or may not be compatible with legal reasoning (IANAL).
Of course, they proceeded to distribute the infringing code under the GPL after they knew it was illegal.
That's the part that I said made me suspect they were in legal lalaland. I *think* (IANAL) they're claiming that since there is no separate SCO copyright on the code, it's an indication they didn't know the code was in there, and so when they distributed it, they didn't know their own IP was part of what they were distributing. In other words, "oh, yeah, we gave away $1M, but we didn't realize that $1K of it was out of our OWN wallets, as you can see because we didn't put our initials on the bills." If that analogy makes any sense.
Stop right there. The GPL is incompatible with the public domain. Please go back to the GNU site and reread the GPL before you post anything else on this subject. If code is public domain, it cannot be GPLed, because the GPL relies upon copyright law, and stuff that is in the public domain by definition is no longer subject to that law.
It is under US law, too (IANAL, but I'm pretty sure about that one).
Correct me if I'm wrong, but I think they're arguing that they didn't put *their* copyright notices on the Linux code that contained "their" "stolen" code, so they didn't invoke the GPL on that code, even though that code was contained within GPLed code, and that they didn't do so because they didn't realize that "their" code was in there, because "they" didn't add it, "someone else" did. Am I paraphrasing their argument accurately? Because if I am, I suspect they are in legal lalaland.
Slashdot Mirror
Well, my Tungsten C runs 802.11b with pop and smtp and http and vnc (therefore proper wireless access); I haven't tried SSH on it yet.
So it sounds to me like a more sensible solution would be to start having inspections, and use the revenue from the inspections to prop up the gas taxes. That way you're helping the environment, too.
Noone knows yet what machines the 970 (the new IBM chip expected to replace the Motorola G4) will be used in first. There's been some speculation that all G4s will be replaced by 970s at the same time because the 970s are cheaper, other speculation that the PowerMacs would be the first, followed by PowerBooks then by iMacs, and yet other speculation that it would be PowerBooks first.
The parent posting made it clear it was talking about commodity hardware, not an Apple-proprietary x86 architecture. There is no reason to believe that an Apple-proprietary x86 architecture would be any cheaper than the 970-based architecture we are likely to get.
Now, why doesn't Apple make OSX for x86 machines ?
I know I shouldn't feed the trolls, but everyone, repeat after me:
Because Apple is a hardware company!
Selling OS X for x86 machines would cut into their margins, encourage their competitors, and there's simply no way they could survive as an OS-only vendor (remember BeOS? That was a lot better than Windows, too).
Novell? I mean, it sounds like the safest bet here. Imagine IBM+Novell. Then just find some excuse to kill SCO's license, misrepresentation maybe. (IANAL, though, so who knows if this is possible).
Think of the four or five books that are most like what you've written. Look up the authors' names in Who's Who or Contemporary Authors to find out the names of their agents. Research the agents to find out if they're likely to want to represent other stuff.
Send them no more than about 20 pages, a chapter or two, with an outline of the whole and a promise to send the whole if they request it, which will make it look far less intimidating on the slush pile. Choose what you send carefully: it should be the part of the book that would be most likely to entice a read to turn to the next chapter, but should be easy enough to understand and read on its own (it shouldn't be too hard to get into). Remember that the reader is likely to toss it down within the first few paragraphs if it's not interesting, and that the reader almost certainly will not be technically oriented.
It will be on the slush pile; unless you've published short stories or done tv scripts or something that has already brought you to the attention of an editor or agent, that's where it goes, waiting for an editorial assistant or agent's assistant to get to it when they have spare time (which is why sending a smaller package is so important - it will look like something that can be knocked off in a few minutes. That's also why it's so important for it to be immediately engaging: if it's not, the EA/agent's assistant [not sure what they call these in agent's offices] will just toss it aside to be returned).
Finally, have patience. You probably won't get it published, and if you do, it probably will take a long time to find a buyer. Very few books get snapped up by the first agent or publisher who reads it.
The website is accessible once again. Time to /. BTW, anyone else feel that the only thing the Raelians are missing is the black clothes and the tennis shoes???
Thousands of people have been calling a phone number asking for God because they saw the phone number on Jim Carrey's pager in a movie over the weekend. Someone has to protect the rest of us from the stupid majority.
Yes, that's them - I think you're off a little bit on the doctrine but that's the gist. And yes, they are still Christians.
Mod parent up Funny, sort of: obscure Mars Climate Orbiter reference.
By nature electronic formats are volatile. When you put it on a CD (what do you mean by "unencrypted?" Only that you don't need the DRM authentication that AAC needs?) you're changing formats. And correct me if I'm wrong, but an original CD is of higher quality than an AAC burned one.
Note that I'm not knocking iTMS, I just think the argument against it in favor of subscription services isn't as strong as it appears.
But the mass conserved from the virtual particles is the mass that fell into the hole, right? I mean, if a hole existed by itself in the universe, with no external mass, it would still evaporate via Hawking radiation?
(Does anyone know if Dreamweaver can use an external editor? I don't remember.)
Yes, in earlier versions: this fun Mac text editor called BBEdit.
I haven't used a recent version of Dreamweaver on the Mac, so I don't know if it still can.
Actually, it is a news organization associated withis a small religious group known as "Christian Science" (offically "The Church of Christ, Scientist"), which has very little in common with Christianity.
Well, right up to that last part. Christian Scientists are Christians; after all, they believe in the resurrection of Jesus. That ultimately is what sets "Christians" apart from "non-Christians." They also consider the Bible to be canonical, they simply have in addition a book - almost a commentary - called Science and Health, with Key to the Scriptures that defines how their doctrine relates to the Bible.
If the Christian Scientists had been around in the 4th or 5th centuries, they might have been considered heretics by the Orthodox Christians and Catholics. But they would be considered Christians by all except the tiny minority of evangelicals who deny that even Catholics are "Christians" because they do not share their doctrinal views.
IANAP. Doesn't Hawking Radiation result from quantum tunneling, i.e., the stuff INSIDE the whole (that got there before it was wrapped up in the r(Schwarzchild)) starts to leak out due to virtual pair production? Or am I a couple of decades behind the times?
Make sure the damned thing has an electric charge. Use electromagnetic repulsion to keep it bottled up. IANAP, but I seem to remember that this question is old hat.
I read the original Lancet letter. It's the thinnest piece of reasoning I've ever seen published in a scholarly journal. The guy is apparently some kind of viruses-from-space kook, who believes that the fact that he's found microbes 40 km up means they're coming from space.
Pay $300 for your operating system on CD, so you can reinstall at any time if necessary, or pay $120 a year for a subscription to an operating system that will expire in a year, then HAVE to pay $150 the next year to keep it for another year. Because that's the same model. And who would buy 7500 songs in a *volatile* format anyway? That is about double the size of my CD collection, which cost me $3200 or so (over 18 years). iTunes works precisely because buying a song is an impulse thing, and is particularly useful for stuff that you like but not enough to by the CD: buying 1 song for $1 is a lot better than buying 1 song and 14 bits of static for $15.
It's not "ra" the womb, it's hystera, the womb. So actually, it's #1. Ripped off from 8 years of classical Greek courses.
ApJ Letters Submission on arxiv
And I also don't think it's up to them to scan every line of code, on the off chance that somehow their code got in there...
Actually, I think it is (IANAL). Whenever we release information to the public, it has to go through clearance to resolve any IP risks. Same should be true of SCO. They should have double-checked that none of their IP sneaked into the kernel. Otherwise how can they prove that the IP didn't get in their due to the actions of a SCO employee working under SCO's orders?
How can anyone OUTSIDE SCO verify their claims, if they've released their own versions of the code under the GPL with their IP in it? How can anyone be sure it isn't some kind of legal mulligan? "Oh, we decided we didn't like GPLing that code after all, but since we've got to deal with the fact that it's in there, we'll just say we didn't put it in, someone else did."
I'm not saying this is what they're doing, I'm saying this is one possible interpretation of the situation that I can think of that may or may not be compatible with legal reasoning (IANAL).
Of course, they proceeded to distribute the infringing code under the GPL after they knew it was illegal.
That's the part that I said made me suspect they were in legal lalaland. I *think* (IANAL) they're claiming that since there is no separate SCO copyright on the code, it's an indication they didn't know the code was in there, and so when they distributed it, they didn't know their own IP was part of what they were distributing. In other words, "oh, yeah, we gave away $1M, but we didn't realize that $1K of it was out of our OWN wallets, as you can see because we didn't put our initials on the bills." If that analogy makes any sense.
If code was released into the GPL public domain
Stop right there. The GPL is incompatible with the public domain. Please go back to the GNU site and reread the GPL before you post anything else on this subject. If code is public domain, it cannot be GPLed, because the GPL relies upon copyright law, and stuff that is in the public domain by definition is no longer subject to that law.
IANAL, but I know that.
It is under US law, too (IANAL, but I'm pretty sure about that one).
Correct me if I'm wrong, but I think they're arguing that they didn't put *their* copyright notices on the Linux code that contained "their" "stolen" code, so they didn't invoke the GPL on that code, even though that code was contained within GPLed code, and that they didn't do so because they didn't realize that "their" code was in there, because "they" didn't add it, "someone else" did. Am I paraphrasing their argument accurately? Because if I am, I suspect they are in legal lalaland.
But IANAL