I did some work in a classified environment for a while. I was developing unclassified software, but integrating it into a classified system in a classified area.
I had a laptop and a pile of floppies outside the classified area. I'd go inside, find a bug, then come out to make any code changes, and bring the changes in on floppy disk. Floppies, of course, could only travel one way, so I had to come with a pretty good stack.
It seemed completely reasonable to me.
Unfortunatly, the current legal standing for privacy is the "expectation" of privacy. And not what a particular person expects, but what the courts think is generally expected.
So if you take a picture of me naked through my bathroom window and publish it, you've violated my privacy. Take the same picture with me on my front lawn, and you haven't.
That being said, I think it's a terrible standard in the modern world, because it allows for the general erosion of privacy as we expect less and less - we no longer expect our purchases to be private, for example. As technology allows more and more of our information to be public, we lose more and more privacy. It's our own cynicism eating away at our legal rights.
There ought to be a new standard, but I haven't a clue as to what it would be.
I don't think that they really mean hardware will be free - only that it will be a loss leader.
It's funny that the same people who decry free software as killing the economic incentive for software development don't feel the same thing applies to hardware.
Ah, but you're wrong - according to the article, Ken Brown was apparently completly ignorant of copyright, patents, and the history of Unix - so his work can be said to be completely his!
I could use some decent facial recognition software to help me sort my rapidly growing collection of digital family photos. I barely have time to pick out the good ones for printing, let alone organize them in some rational way. I've often wished I could use facial recognition software to go through and create a database of the people in my pictures, so I could automatically send pictures to people who would be interested.
I seriously doubt "the disabled" filed this lawsuit, but rather it was some idiot at the county who, in the same voice as "think of the children", uttered "think of the disabled"
Actually, California (and Berkeley in particular) is a center of disabled activism. Knowing nothing about this (hey, gimme a break), I wouldn't be surprised if it was filed by a disabled advocacy group.
In California, the disabled look after themselves.
I am a recent convert to the joy of eBooks. I just bought the low end palm (Zire 21 for $99) to help organize my life. A few days ago I downloaded the Weasel Reader and got some Mark Twain short storied off of the Gutenberg Project.
What I've found is that it's no substitute for sitting down with a real book, but it's great when waiting around at the post office, eating lunch, or any time I have some time I'd like to read but may not have planned for and brought a book.
The article and Sony seemed to be concerned with content, with the focus on this product that you can get a cheaper eBook than a real book. That, to me, is not a compelling reason to buy the thing. The collection at the Gutenberg Project would make it compelling for me, and I'm surprised that the eBook world has not embraced that in their marketing. Perhaps it's because consumer technology traditionally enables the sale of "content" (records, DVD's, etc.), and pointing to free content might be a no-no to publishers of current works. But if they wanted to sell the hardware, it would be a pretty gutsy move to advertise "thousands of free classic titles".
Not really... microlensing causes an increase in the brightness of the star, not a change in the apperent position. Although you've drawn a nice picture of gravitational lensing. (see, for example, einsteins cross)
But the point is, we don't know that quantum mechanics is correct.
In the sense that we know anything in science, we know that quantum mechanics is correct. If you want to go down the path of "all science is just the current best guess", that's true, and we'll all end up talking about whether we're just brains in a lab somewhere being fed artificial stimulation to simulate reality.
The nature of the true randomness of quantum phenomena is about as well known and verified as anything in science.
It's funny how Republicans control the house, the senate, the white house, and that their is a conservative majority on the supreme court, and they STILL feel victimized and marginalized.
From the article:
"Richard then demanded $300,000 of taxpayer dollars from the county. Richard said the money would offset the huge expense of running the Web site for the 33 months."
Yes, he's ask for $300,000, acording to the article
Of the two technologies, Gemesis diamonds do come out yellow because of Nitrogen impurities. They can also make clear, but it takes longer (read: more expensive) because they include nitrogen getters and have to grow more slowly.
Ah, but if the source code for Windows has been carefully concealed until now, and the source code for all the GPL software has been openly available, it would be a lot easier to convince a jury that code flowed from GPL'd software to Microsoft, rather than vise versa.
Microsoft is a "Serious Corp", but it hires thousands of programmers who all have access to the net and a complete set of source code for most GPL'd projects.
Slashdot Mirror
I did some work in a classified environment for a while. I was developing unclassified software, but integrating it into a classified system in a classified area.
I had a laptop and a pile of floppies outside the classified area. I'd go inside, find a bug, then come out to make any code changes, and bring the changes in on floppy disk. Floppies, of course, could only travel one way, so I had to come with a pretty good stack.
It seemed completely reasonable to me.
Intrestingly,
nigritude ultramarine
produces no results, but
"nigritude ultramarine"
produces a bunch.
Don't know how useful that's gonna be.
You get hooked when your data and files start accumulating in a proprietary format which may be difficult to translate over.
So if you take a picture of me naked through my bathroom window and publish it, you've violated my privacy. Take the same picture with me on my front lawn, and you haven't.
That being said, I think it's a terrible standard in the modern world, because it allows for the general erosion of privacy as we expect less and less - we no longer expect our purchases to be private, for example. As technology allows more and more of our information to be public, we lose more and more privacy. It's our own cynicism eating away at our legal rights.
There ought to be a new standard, but I haven't a clue as to what it would be.
How handy that he has a toll free number!
They still have $6,767,000 worth of goodwill - I guess they didn't subtract out the badwill.
It's funny that the same people who decry free software as killing the economic incentive for software development don't feel the same thing applies to hardware.
My SpamBayes filter tells me I've received 129 emails with a .biz url in the message. Every single one was spam.
Actually, California (and Berkeley in particular) is a center of disabled activism. Knowing nothing about this (hey, gimme a break), I wouldn't be surprised if it was filed by a disabled advocacy group.
In California, the disabled look after themselves.
I'm pretty sure the atomic nuclei and electrons of synthetic and real diamonds are the same...
Perhaps you meant at the atomic level.
What I've found is that it's no substitute for sitting down with a real book, but it's great when waiting around at the post office, eating lunch, or any time I have some time I'd like to read but may not have planned for and brought a book.
The article and Sony seemed to be concerned with content, with the focus on this product that you can get a cheaper eBook than a real book. That, to me, is not a compelling reason to buy the thing. The collection at the Gutenberg Project would make it compelling for me, and I'm surprised that the eBook world has not embraced that in their marketing. Perhaps it's because consumer technology traditionally enables the sale of "content" (records, DVD's, etc.), and pointing to free content might be a no-no to publishers of current works. But if they wanted to sell the hardware, it would be a pretty gutsy move to advertise "thousands of free classic titles".
Not really... microlensing causes an increase in the brightness of the star, not a change in the apperent position. Although you've drawn a nice picture of gravitational lensing. (see, for example, einsteins cross)
Yes, I plan to try liquid nitrogen cooling!
In the sense that we know anything in science, we know that quantum mechanics is correct. If you want to go down the path of "all science is just the current best guess", that's true, and we'll all end up talking about whether we're just brains in a lab somewhere being fed artificial stimulation to simulate reality.
The nature of the true randomness of quantum phenomena is about as well known and verified as anything in science.
And next week I'm filing a suit to challenge the height of copyright expansion!
From the article: "Richard then demanded $300,000 of taxpayer dollars from the county. Richard said the money would offset the huge expense of running the Web site for the 33 months."
Yes, he's ask for $300,000, acording to the article
Of the two technologies, Gemesis diamonds do come out yellow because of Nitrogen impurities. They can also make clear, but it takes longer (read: more expensive) because they include nitrogen getters and have to grow more slowly.
Microsoft is a "Serious Corp", but it hires thousands of programmers who all have access to the net and a complete set of source code for most GPL'd projects.
I wanted a "low-cost" demo, not a $500,000 demo!