The difference is service. Oracle and CSX provide services - Oracle might provide hardware/software, but it's licensed, not bought. Intel makes widgets, but it continually comes out with new generations of faster and faster widgets.
The problem is there comes a point where nobody wants to upgrade their OS. And it's software - it doesn't degrade over time. It doesn't "wear out" so you have to buy a new one like physical widgets. In my own personal experience, I've already reached that point. I use Ubuntu now, but prior to that, I'd been on XP for years after Vista had come out, and had no reason to move. Microsoft saw that coming, and has been trying to diversify like the blazes, so that when the crunch-time came, they'd have something else to fall back on.
It doesn't help that Microsoft also has a competitor that it is utterly incapable of competing against on price. Free is hard to beat. If Intel saw some rising phenomenon that spelled the end of processors, or CSX feared the development of a technology that would render rail obsolete, you'd see the same sort of behaviour in them you see in Microsoft.
"Middle Eastern" and "Muslim" are not interchangeable. Iraq was not a Muslim nation - it's government was entirely secular. Then again, if you think that *Israel* is a Muslim state, you really shouldn't even be joining the conversation.
I don't know how you can say that in this case. Apple's misusing trademark law, and MS is calling them on it. I don't even know how "embrace, extend and extinguish" can be applied to trademark law. It's not like Microsoft is trying to inter-operate with Apple's trademark, extend the standard, then come to dominate it when it's proprietary trademark-extension become widespread.
I'm no Microsoft fanboy - I'll happily cheer as they get swirled down the toilet of obscurity. But in this particular case, they're on the right side. For reasons of their own, which I doubt are altruistic, but still the right side.
If that worked, then we would never have committed genocide the first time. But we did, numerous times, independently, on different continents and in different cultures. Obviously, the lack of a precedent isn't going to prevent us doing it again.
Actually I started playing WoW again with Cataclysm and the game is even more packed than I remember it during Burning Crusade days.
WoW has done exactly what the article claims Star Wars should have done - the redone starting areas for Gnomes, Worgen and Goblins are really epic. The introduction of the "phasing" mechanic has allowed it to appear like individual players have an actual effect on the game world. Quest hub, flight path re-jigging and one-off transport from quests has eliminated a lot of the boring travel time. The redesign of skill acquisition and talent points has removed the "same spell, but better" syndrome experienced between 40 and the level cap.
WoW isn't a static target; it's a different game than it was back in 2006. They even had an (admittedly fairly minor) graphics engine update - although it's graphics are still probably the most anachronistic part of it. That, though, is part of its charm too - my wife can run it fine on her fairly old, generic computer.
Or just connect smarter - my n900 connects to wireless networks on demand and auto disconnects when not in use. I can get 1.5 - 2 days of light usage off its battery.
This is a *perfect* example of how *some* politics *does* need to go on behind closed doors, and that *some* amount of secrecy is, in fact, necessary.
And in fact, if the level of secrecy that had gone on was that which was necessary and did not, for example, include covering up child prostitution by US contractors and bribery of UN officials, you wouldn't have leaks like this at all. Private Manning, seeing only legitimate diplomatic traffic, wouldn't have been outraged enough to do anything about it, and Wikileaks, seeing nothing sensational or interesting, would have had not motivation to release them. If a government wants to avoid this sort of thing, all they have to do is be honest and frank with the people they're supposed to be serving when they screw up, and not act maliciously or against the will of their citizens - things that they should be doing anyway.
This is collateral damage. If a country is going to hide their dirty laundry in amongst its clean, behind the wall of secrecy, then when someone exposes the dirty stuff, you're going to get the white sheets too. The question is, do you believe the rest of the material, and the consequences of the leak which are now working out on the world stage, are worth the trade off? I do, and so do many others.
In the end, Wikileaks is making the truth known. Zimbabweans have a right to know what deals the man who wants to be their leader is trying to make on their behalf. Democracy requires an informed public. Your insinuation that the people will turn against the person who you paternalisticly believe is better for them is what's anti-democratic here. And if the people won't turn against him, despite being informed of his policies, then Wikileaks has done no harm.
Uh-huh. Because all those countries that haven't evolved through Judeo-Christian values are so tolerant of homosexual marriage: China, North Korea, India, etc.
While cultures have tolerated homosexuality (also in the Western tradition: see ancient Greece, Rome), very few (none?) have allowed homosexual marriage as an institution equal to heterosexual marriage.
So, yeah, your little anti-religious rant is a clear indication of bias. It obviously has little to do with anti-homosexual marriage, or we would see it in avowed atheist nations like China, or polytheistic nations like India. You're trying to justify your dislike of religion, not to uncover the root cause of why homosexual marriage is not supported.
The government, private industry, and even individuals. Have private things that they want to keep private. By law, everyone's privacy is protected.
No. By law individual's privacy is protected. Due to companies being considered individuals due to legal stupidity, they may sneak in. Even without that, there is the concept of trade secrets. But the Government has no "right to privacy" because it's not a person.
When documents that are supposed to be private are "stolen" that is espionage and theft.
No. Firstly, if my documents are stolen, it's not espionage. It's theft. Secondly, the governments document weren't stolen, they were copied.
How would you guys like it if the content of your hard drives was stolen and then posted on the internet? How would you like it if they did it under the guise of keeping you honest?
Depends. Was I being funded to the tune of billions by the people I was trying to keep things secret from? Do the documents contain information about how I was abusing my position? Actually, you're right - I'd be pissed. But my feeling has nothing to do with the right or wrong of the situation. In fact, I'd probably be pissed because I had been caught, and was about to cop holy hell. In short, data on my HD != government data. Apples != Oranges
Yes I understand that our government has to be transparent. There are however, methods to get information in the properway. Using the law, one can subpena the governemet, private industry, and individuals.
Uh-huh. Which means you have to know about it before you can invoke FoI laws. If the government keeps their activities secret enough, nobody knows what exactly they need to subpoena to get the information. Even then, you're assuming that the government abides by the laws when, as the leaked documents prove, they have no problem just ignoring laws when they chose.
Basically, the protections must be in place to protect everyone, lest they be excluded whimsically. Much like our right to free speech. Everyone, has the right to free speech in the US. Even people that speak with hate.
Again, you're conflating individuals and government. Stop that. Unless you'd like to give me the right to tax everyone as I see fit. Need to keep "everybody" equal, you know.
Yeah, but think of how many planes land in how much space at a given airfield. Then think of traffic at a busy carpark. Just the space required to taxi in is infeasible if you're talking major volumes in single-person sizes.
No fossil fuel doesn't necessarily preclude internal combustion, or require batteries. Bio-diesel or nuclear are two options I can think of off the top of my head - although they come with their own slew of problems. That's why they're having a competition - so smart people can run headlong into these problems and take them out.
Also I imagine anything of this kind pretty much has to be VTOL. Anything else is simply too complicated and too computationally difficult when it comes to air traffic control and landing procedures, as the GP points out.
Slashdot Mirror
It's State government. They don't do "best"
The difference is service. Oracle and CSX provide services - Oracle might provide hardware/software, but it's licensed, not bought. Intel makes widgets, but it continually comes out with new generations of faster and faster widgets.
The problem is there comes a point where nobody wants to upgrade their OS. And it's software - it doesn't degrade over time. It doesn't "wear out" so you have to buy a new one like physical widgets. In my own personal experience, I've already reached that point. I use Ubuntu now, but prior to that, I'd been on XP for years after Vista had come out, and had no reason to move. Microsoft saw that coming, and has been trying to diversify like the blazes, so that when the crunch-time came, they'd have something else to fall back on.
It doesn't help that Microsoft also has a competitor that it is utterly incapable of competing against on price. Free is hard to beat. If Intel saw some rising phenomenon that spelled the end of processors, or CSX feared the development of a technology that would render rail obsolete, you'd see the same sort of behaviour in them you see in Microsoft.
Physicists confirm: universe is a TARDIS
lol. Sovereign Risk.
"Middle Eastern" and "Muslim" are not interchangeable. Iraq was not a Muslim nation - it's government was entirely secular. Then again, if you think that *Israel* is a Muslim state, you really shouldn't even be joining the conversation.
Uh-huh, because not being harassed by law enforcement is "more than they deserve". You certainly merit your handle.
To be fair, the first name is different too.
I don't know how you can say that in this case. Apple's misusing trademark law, and MS is calling them on it. I don't even know how "embrace, extend and extinguish" can be applied to trademark law. It's not like Microsoft is trying to inter-operate with Apple's trademark, extend the standard, then come to dominate it when it's proprietary trademark-extension become widespread.
I'm no Microsoft fanboy - I'll happily cheer as they get swirled down the toilet of obscurity. But in this particular case, they're on the right side. For reasons of their own, which I doubt are altruistic, but still the right side.
You should cheer for whichever is right, regardless of who you love/hate. To do otherwise sets a dangerous precedent.
In this case, cheer for Microsoft.
Not including something in a compilation isn't the same as trying to modify history to remove references to it.
If that worked, then we would never have committed genocide the first time. But we did, numerous times, independently, on different continents and in different cultures. Obviously, the lack of a precedent isn't going to prevent us doing it again.
Actually I started playing WoW again with Cataclysm and the game is even more packed than I remember it during Burning Crusade days.
WoW has done exactly what the article claims Star Wars should have done - the redone starting areas for Gnomes, Worgen and Goblins are really epic. The introduction of the "phasing" mechanic has allowed it to appear like individual players have an actual effect on the game world. Quest hub, flight path re-jigging and one-off transport from quests has eliminated a lot of the boring travel time. The redesign of skill acquisition and talent points has removed the "same spell, but better" syndrome experienced between 40 and the level cap.
WoW isn't a static target; it's a different game than it was back in 2006. They even had an (admittedly fairly minor) graphics engine update - although it's graphics are still probably the most anachronistic part of it. That, though, is part of its charm too - my wife can run it fine on her fairly old, generic computer.
Or just connect smarter - my n900 connects to wireless networks on demand and auto disconnects when not in use. I can get 1.5 - 2 days of light usage off its battery.
I see your Penny Arcade, and raise you an XKCD: http://xkcd.com/800/
"...is establishing a patent troll called CPTN to attack open source software..."
As they say in the fact verification industry, [citation needed].
And as we say in the conveniently truncated quotation industry - try again, troll.
Just swap CME for AGW and you'll fit right in.
This is a *perfect* example of how *some* politics *does* need to go on behind closed doors, and that *some* amount of secrecy is, in fact, necessary.
And in fact, if the level of secrecy that had gone on was that which was necessary and did not, for example, include covering up child prostitution by US contractors and bribery of UN officials, you wouldn't have leaks like this at all. Private Manning, seeing only legitimate diplomatic traffic, wouldn't have been outraged enough to do anything about it, and Wikileaks, seeing nothing sensational or interesting, would have had not motivation to release them. If a government wants to avoid this sort of thing, all they have to do is be honest and frank with the people they're supposed to be serving when they screw up, and not act maliciously or against the will of their citizens - things that they should be doing anyway.
This is collateral damage. If a country is going to hide their dirty laundry in amongst its clean, behind the wall of secrecy, then when someone exposes the dirty stuff, you're going to get the white sheets too. The question is, do you believe the rest of the material, and the consequences of the leak which are now working out on the world stage, are worth the trade off? I do, and so do many others.
In the end, Wikileaks is making the truth known. Zimbabweans have a right to know what deals the man who wants to be their leader is trying to make on their behalf. Democracy requires an informed public. Your insinuation that the people will turn against the person who you paternalisticly believe is better for them is what's anti-democratic here. And if the people won't turn against him, despite being informed of his policies, then Wikileaks has done no harm.
Please. He's complaining that they fail because Google translations of their language don't make sense to him?
Uh-huh. Because all those countries that haven't evolved through Judeo-Christian values are so tolerant of homosexual marriage: China, North Korea, India, etc.
While cultures have tolerated homosexuality (also in the Western tradition: see ancient Greece, Rome), very few (none?) have allowed homosexual marriage as an institution equal to heterosexual marriage.
So, yeah, your little anti-religious rant is a clear indication of bias. It obviously has little to do with anti-homosexual marriage, or we would see it in avowed atheist nations like China, or polytheistic nations like India. You're trying to justify your dislike of religion, not to uncover the root cause of why homosexual marriage is not supported.
People, is this really transparency?
Yes.
Or is this espionage?
No. Maybe in regards to Private Manning.
The government, private industry, and even individuals. Have private things that they want to keep private. By law, everyone's privacy is protected.
No. By law individual's privacy is protected. Due to companies being considered individuals due to legal stupidity, they may sneak in. Even without that, there is the concept of trade secrets. But the Government has no "right to privacy" because it's not a person.
When documents that are supposed to be private are "stolen" that is espionage and theft.
No. Firstly, if my documents are stolen, it's not espionage. It's theft. Secondly, the governments document weren't stolen, they were copied.
How would you guys like it if the content of your hard drives was stolen and then posted on the internet? How would you like it if they did it under the guise of keeping you honest?
Depends. Was I being funded to the tune of billions by the people I was trying to keep things secret from? Do the documents contain information about how I was abusing my position?
Actually, you're right - I'd be pissed. But my feeling has nothing to do with the right or wrong of the situation. In fact, I'd probably be pissed because I had been caught, and was about to cop holy hell.
In short, data on my HD != government data. Apples != Oranges
Yes I understand that our government has to be transparent. There are however, methods to get information in the properway. Using the law, one can subpena the governemet, private industry, and individuals.
Uh-huh. Which means you have to know about it before you can invoke FoI laws. If the government keeps their activities secret enough, nobody knows what exactly they need to subpoena to get the information. Even then, you're assuming that the government abides by the laws when, as the leaked documents prove, they have no problem just ignoring laws when they chose.
Basically, the protections must be in place to protect everyone, lest they be excluded whimsically. Much like our right to free speech. Everyone, has the right to free speech in the US. Even people that speak with hate.
Again, you're conflating individuals and government. Stop that. Unless you'd like to give me the right to tax everyone as I see fit. Need to keep "everybody" equal, you know.
I was thinking more along the lines of enacting law via treaty - e.g. ACTA
They're the same system. Seems like the US makes up their laws as they go along, and the US makes up Sweden's laws as they go along.
Not like I can talk though, as an Australian.
Yeah, but think of how many planes land in how much space at a given airfield. Then think of traffic at a busy carpark. Just the space required to taxi in is infeasible if you're talking major volumes in single-person sizes.
No fossil fuel doesn't necessarily preclude internal combustion, or require batteries. Bio-diesel or nuclear are two options I can think of off the top of my head - although they come with their own slew of problems. That's why they're having a competition - so smart people can run headlong into these problems and take them out.
Also I imagine anything of this kind pretty much has to be VTOL. Anything else is simply too complicated and too computationally difficult when it comes to air traffic control and landing procedures, as the GP points out.