At least part of the problem is that our Australian Green party doesn't believe in backburning, and actively try and prevent it. The CSIRO (Australia's main scientific institute) recommended that 10% of public land be burned annually to clear fuel (dread brush and the like that accumulates quickly in Australia's hot, dry climate). The public policy produced by that report dropped the recommendation to 5%. Tasmania, in which the Greens hold the balance of power, burned 1%.
It's got nothing to do with language changes. Starting sentences with "and" has been valid usage for centuries, formal or informal. An example off the top of my head - "And can it be", a hymn composed in the 16th century, where "and" isn't simply the first word of a sentence, but the first word of the entire piece, although it's not used as a conjunction in this context.
Starting sentences with "and" is a frequently mis-used construction, and primary school grammar teaches instruct their pupils to avoid it for that reason. The problem is, few people ever advance past grade school English, which is why people can't use colons or semi-colons properly either.
I have no problem with the evolution of language, but evolution should be progressive - as the language develops, it should become able to express more concepts. This is happening - we're constantly adding new words and new idiomatic expressions to the language - but it's also devolving, we're expressive ability is lost due to the increasing lack of speakers to appreciate grammatical precision and fine distinctions.
So you're saying that, since the total value of what the guy took was 0 (nothing was removed from the possession of its owners), it was a zero dollar piracy operation?
It's not entrapment. He committed the crime without being encouraged by LEO. He performed an action in his country that his country declined to prosecute or deport him for. So the US LEO tempted him into their jurisdiction so they could arrest him for a crime committed elsewhere.
And, likewise, because you don't understand the etymology. Capitalising "god" in reference to the Christian deity isn't anything to do with respect. At some point in time, the Israelites stopped to referring to their deity by name, in order to avoid the whole "do not take the LORD's name in vain" commandment. Instead, they replaced it with a series of letters that's now known as the Tetragrammaton - YHWH. The pronunciation of that sequence is unknown, but various guesses have given us Yahweh and Jehovah. When the translators were translating the Bible, they replaced the Tetragrammaton with small-caps LORD. Where you see LORD in the Bible, it's where God's name would have gone if the Israelites hadn't censored it all out. Because we essentially lost the name, we use God (capital G) as the name of the Christian god. It's as much a proper noun as any other name, and deliberately de-capitalising it doesn't make any particular point - it just makes you look petty.
The phrase "catholic tastes" is fairly widespread. It's rapidly becoming one of those phrases that people use without knowing the meaning of, because they are ignorant of their own language.
Depends what you mean. Catholic (capital C) is a proper noun, as it's the name of a specific entity. Catholic with a lower c is an adjective that means "universal" or "all-encompassing". Thus a person with "catholic tastes" is someone who enjoys a wide variety of things. It also hints at the etymological roots of Catholic (capital C), which was supposed to be a universal church. It also explains why protestant churches keep the phrase "holy catholic church" in their liturgies, as it's the adjective rather than the proper noun.
Gorilla Glass' primary feature is scratch-resistance, not shatter-proofing. Apple already uses Gorilla Glass. To me, it seems like their devices shatter so easily for three reasons: - The "glass sandwich" design (double the chance of shattering) - Flat flush face (my Nexus S has a slight curve to the face, which means when I drop it, none of the screen actually impacts the ground) - Aluminium instead of plastic (it increases the phone's weight unnecessarily, meaning more damage when it drops)
Banks. People that charge interest on loans. It's just lazy rent seeking. But it adds no value to the economy and only serves as a means of concentrating capital into a few wealthy folks.
You know what caused the global financial crisis that sent a decent chunk of the world into recession? Lack of available credit. Without charging interest, it's not possible to make a profit from a loan. And when that happens? No loans. None.
No small business loans, no mortgages, no car loans, no education loans. No way for anyone who isn't already rich to bootstrap themselves up.
Maybe you should try understanding economics before suggesting "improvements" to it.
Because nothing says "dynamic typing" like Java. The sort of introspection that runs merry-hell with generating call graphs isn't a function of dynamically typed languages.
Thing is, it wasn't a consumer show. It was a journalist show. There's no such thing as a consumer show anyway - if consumers were excited enough about the goods in question, they'd be tech enthusiasts by definition.
With modern distributed VCSs, like git, or mercurial, every clone is a repository. That's not to say backups aren't important, but if you've got your clone on your laptop, then you'll have lost nothing except what's been committed since the last time you pulled down the codebase.
Let me know how well that goes for you when your IDE tries to generate a call graph including third party applications that interface with yours via an HTTP API.
The journo in the article is saying that CES is failing because companies no longer use it to launch their latest iteration of gadget. Instead, it's being used to showcase their pie-in-the-sky aspirations. It's becoming less a PR mouthpiece, and more a tech demo for cool, but not production-ready, tech.
Why would you go to a cafe to do that, though? Even if it turns out to be a popular idea, they're going to get undercut by pure-play online vendors who need to hire a fraction of the staff, and can rent smaller, lower-upkeep offices in less expensive areas.
My Mum's photo-mad. She (and my Father and brother) collectively have about $25,000 worth of high-end amateur gear, regularly take classes, and go on photo safaris. Prior to the digital revolution, she had albums upon albums of print photos.
She hasn't printed one now for over 10 years. None of us in my family have. We still get physical photos, but nowadays they're always either large canvas prints for hanging on a wall, or photobooks (like those produced by albumworks and others). The traditional single print? Haven't seen one for a decade. I don't think this is a winning proposition.
You know, I often find myself forgetting that Steam is essentially DRM.
Have you ever actually noticed Steam's DRM? That is, in the course of your legitimate use of the product, has it ever falsely denied you the ability to perform an action?
If not, that's probably why you don't, and why Steam is least bitched-about DRM I've heard of.
Quite the contrary. Despite the various third world nations that the US insists on sticking its military nose into, the world's more stable than it's been in a century. We basically lurched from war to war for the last hundred years - WW1 to WW2, through to the Cold War, with a brief stop-over in Veitnam. Of course, that doesn't say what tomorrow's going to be like - I expect that sometime in the next 50 years there's going to be a major shift in powers that may or may not result in large-scale armed conflict.
He might even do something silly like stay in a hotel, instead of renting an apartment.
Speaking as a landlord, if a homeless guy is looking for an apartment, and his credentials are "haven't had a home or job for 12 months, but some guy just gave me a grand", he's not going to be able to get an apartment. It costs money (advertising, legal costs) to arrange for a new lease. You're not going to pay that just to get someone in who can only afford the place for a couple of months.
Until you can download nightlies of Android and see the current bug list, it's not "open" source, it's "source available".
No, that's you just you making stuff up. That's not in any definition of open source I've ever heard apart from in your comment. It's certainly not a requirement of any open source license, which only requires access to the source at the time of distribution. What you're saying is that any project where a developer doesn't do a nightly push to a public repo is now no longer open source, because some portion of the development is done "in secret".
Development is all in secret and you need to sign away all your rights to get anything before it's shipped to users, meaning that while the license is technically open you can't actually use that freedom effectively.
Your freedom is only effective if you can get access to the source before it's stable and ready for release? That's just total bull. Yeah, for OEMs in a highly competitive market, it's advantageous to be able to get access to the pre-release source so they can be on the cutting edge. For individual consumers? It's pretty much meaningless.
Yes, it's more "open" than iOS, but that's not saying much.
Considering that iOS is 100% proprietary, closed source, it's saying quite a bit.
Certainly. Google is just getting around to reducing the fragmentation in the OS levels on the myriad of devices out there, and now there is going to be a proprietary (Google) SDK as well as a fully open (Replicant) SDK. This isn't exactly going to help thin the fragmentation herd.
As someone upthread noted, the changes to the license don't actually change what you can do with it - these restrictions were already in place, just with slightly different verbiage. They're not new at all.
Besides, Google has always prided itself in the fact that Android is open source. The new wording doesn't quite seem to hold the same theme as Andy Rubin's snarky twitter entry: "the definition of open: "mkdir android ; cd android ; repo init -u git://android.git.kernel.org/platform/manifest.git ; repo sync ; make"
This article is about Android's SDK, not Android itself. You can still compile Android just the same, and Android is just as free as it ever was.
Slashdot Mirror
At least part of the problem is that our Australian Green party doesn't believe in backburning, and actively try and prevent it. The CSIRO (Australia's main scientific institute) recommended that 10% of public land be burned annually to clear fuel (dread brush and the like that accumulates quickly in Australia's hot, dry climate). The public policy produced by that report dropped the recommendation to 5%. Tasmania, in which the Greens hold the balance of power, burned 1%.
"Hottest national averages on record (before today)."
It's got nothing to do with language changes. Starting sentences with "and" has been valid usage for centuries, formal or informal. An example off the top of my head - "And can it be", a hymn composed in the 16th century, where "and" isn't simply the first word of a sentence, but the first word of the entire piece, although it's not used as a conjunction in this context.
Starting sentences with "and" is a frequently mis-used construction, and primary school grammar teaches instruct their pupils to avoid it for that reason. The problem is, few people ever advance past grade school English, which is why people can't use colons or semi-colons properly either.
I have no problem with the evolution of language, but evolution should be progressive - as the language develops, it should become able to express more concepts. This is happening - we're constantly adding new words and new idiomatic expressions to the language - but it's also devolving, we're expressive ability is lost due to the increasing lack of speakers to appreciate grammatical precision and fine distinctions.
Didn't you get the memo? The whole world is the US' jurisdiction. Has been since WW2
So you're saying that, since the total value of what the guy took was 0 (nothing was removed from the possession of its owners), it was a zero dollar piracy operation?
It's not entrapment. He committed the crime without being encouraged by LEO. He performed an action in his country that his country declined to prosecute or deport him for. So the US LEO tempted him into their jurisdiction so they could arrest him for a crime committed elsewhere.
Still dodgy as hell, but not entrapment.
And, likewise, because you don't understand the etymology. Capitalising "god" in reference to the Christian deity isn't anything to do with respect. At some point in time, the Israelites stopped to referring to their deity by name, in order to avoid the whole "do not take the LORD's name in vain" commandment. Instead, they replaced it with a series of letters that's now known as the Tetragrammaton - YHWH. The pronunciation of that sequence is unknown, but various guesses have given us Yahweh and Jehovah. When the translators were translating the Bible, they replaced the Tetragrammaton with small-caps LORD. Where you see LORD in the Bible, it's where God's name would have gone if the Israelites hadn't censored it all out. Because we essentially lost the name, we use God (capital G) as the name of the Christian god. It's as much a proper noun as any other name, and deliberately de-capitalising it doesn't make any particular point - it just makes you look petty.
You do realize that F=MA? So no, elephants don't bounce when you drop them like beetles do.
The phrase "catholic tastes" is fairly widespread. It's rapidly becoming one of those phrases that people use without knowing the meaning of, because they are ignorant of their own language.
Depends what you mean. Catholic (capital C) is a proper noun, as it's the name of a specific entity. Catholic with a lower c is an adjective that means "universal" or "all-encompassing". Thus a person with "catholic tastes" is someone who enjoys a wide variety of things. It also hints at the etymological roots of Catholic (capital C), which was supposed to be a universal church. It also explains why protestant churches keep the phrase "holy catholic church" in their liturgies, as it's the adjective rather than the proper noun.
Gorilla Glass' primary feature is scratch-resistance, not shatter-proofing. Apple already uses Gorilla Glass. To me, it seems like their devices shatter so easily for three reasons:
- The "glass sandwich" design (double the chance of shattering)
- Flat flush face (my Nexus S has a slight curve to the face, which means when I drop it, none of the screen actually impacts the ground)
- Aluminium instead of plastic (it increases the phone's weight unnecessarily, meaning more damage when it drops)
Banks. People that charge interest on loans. It's just lazy rent seeking. But it adds no value to the economy and only serves as a means of concentrating capital into a few wealthy folks.
You know what caused the global financial crisis that sent a decent chunk of the world into recession? Lack of available credit. Without charging interest, it's not possible to make a profit from a loan. And when that happens? No loans. None.
No small business loans, no mortgages, no car loans, no education loans. No way for anyone who isn't already rich to bootstrap themselves up.
Maybe you should try understanding economics before suggesting "improvements" to it.
Because nothing says "dynamic typing" like Java. The sort of introspection that runs merry-hell with generating call graphs isn't a function of dynamically typed languages.
Thing is, it wasn't a consumer show. It was a journalist show. There's no such thing as a consumer show anyway - if consumers were excited enough about the goods in question, they'd be tech enthusiasts by definition.
With modern distributed VCSs, like git, or mercurial, every clone is a repository. That's not to say backups aren't important, but if you've got your clone on your laptop, then you'll have lost nothing except what's been committed since the last time you pulled down the codebase.
Let me know how well that goes for you when your IDE tries to generate a call graph including third party applications that interface with yours via an HTTP API.
The journo in the article is saying that CES is failing because companies no longer use it to launch their latest iteration of gadget. Instead, it's being used to showcase their pie-in-the-sky aspirations. It's becoming less a PR mouthpiece, and more a tech demo for cool, but not production-ready, tech.
In my opinion, that can only be a good thing.
Why would you go to a cafe to do that, though? Even if it turns out to be a popular idea, they're going to get undercut by pure-play online vendors who need to hire a fraction of the staff, and can rent smaller, lower-upkeep offices in less expensive areas.
My Mum's photo-mad. She (and my Father and brother) collectively have about $25,000 worth of high-end amateur gear, regularly take classes, and go on photo safaris. Prior to the digital revolution, she had albums upon albums of print photos.
She hasn't printed one now for over 10 years. None of us in my family have. We still get physical photos, but nowadays they're always either large canvas prints for hanging on a wall, or photobooks (like those produced by albumworks and others). The traditional single print? Haven't seen one for a decade. I don't think this is a winning proposition.
You know, I often find myself forgetting that Steam is essentially DRM.
Have you ever actually noticed Steam's DRM? That is, in the course of your legitimate use of the product, has it ever falsely denied you the ability to perform an action?
If not, that's probably why you don't, and why Steam is least bitched-about DRM I've heard of.
The world isn't exactly stable either.
Quite the contrary. Despite the various third world nations that the US insists on sticking its military nose into, the world's more stable than it's been in a century. We basically lurched from war to war for the last hundred years - WW1 to WW2, through to the Cold War, with a brief stop-over in Veitnam. Of course, that doesn't say what tomorrow's going to be like - I expect that sometime in the next 50 years there's going to be a major shift in powers that may or may not result in large-scale armed conflict.
He might even do something silly like stay in a hotel, instead of renting an apartment.
Speaking as a landlord, if a homeless guy is looking for an apartment, and his credentials are "haven't had a home or job for 12 months, but some guy just gave me a grand", he's not going to be able to get an apartment. It costs money (advertising, legal costs) to arrange for a new lease. You're not going to pay that just to get someone in who can only afford the place for a couple of months.
And yet you didn't require one for the far less comprehensive and detailed OP?
Until you can download nightlies of Android and see the current bug list, it's not "open" source, it's "source available".
No, that's you just you making stuff up. That's not in any definition of open source I've ever heard apart from in your comment. It's certainly not a requirement of any open source license, which only requires access to the source at the time of distribution. What you're saying is that any project where a developer doesn't do a nightly push to a public repo is now no longer open source, because some portion of the development is done "in secret".
Development is all in secret and you need to sign away all your rights to get anything before it's shipped to users, meaning that while the license is technically open you can't actually use that freedom effectively.
Your freedom is only effective if you can get access to the source before it's stable and ready for release? That's just total bull. Yeah, for OEMs in a highly competitive market, it's advantageous to be able to get access to the pre-release source so they can be on the cutting edge. For individual consumers? It's pretty much meaningless.
Yes, it's more "open" than iOS, but that's not saying much.
Considering that iOS is 100% proprietary, closed source, it's saying quite a bit.
Certainly. Google is just getting around to reducing the fragmentation in the OS levels on the myriad of devices out there, and now there is going to be a proprietary (Google) SDK as well as a fully open (Replicant) SDK. This isn't exactly going to help thin the fragmentation herd.
As someone upthread noted, the changes to the license don't actually change what you can do with it - these restrictions were already in place, just with slightly different verbiage. They're not new at all.
Besides, Google has always prided itself in the fact that Android is open source. The new wording doesn't quite seem to hold the same theme as Andy Rubin's snarky twitter entry: "the definition of open: "mkdir android ; cd android ; repo init -u git://android.git.kernel.org/platform/manifest.git ; repo sync ; make"
This article is about Android's SDK, not Android itself. You can still compile Android just the same, and Android is just as free as it ever was.