... and the West will go go into long term decline like the UK has.
Dang, what a depressing ending. I was hoping for something more like, "... which will cause a chain reaction so great that it could disrupt the very fabric of the space-time continuum and destroy the entire universe!"
Okay, so she forgets her cellphone or the battery is dead and you go about your business forgetting to check the message after seeing it's "Unavailable".
...and she only decides to call you once (instead of "maybe he's in the bathroom") and she can't think of anybody else's phone number and there is no one around (maybe she's in a desert) and she used her last bit of change and can't remember how to dial collect and and and...
The courts have taken, and will continue to take, decisions that are unpopular with the public at the time, based upon what the law states, not on public opinion.
Thank you so much for saying that! I'm glad there are people who understand how essential this is. Do you realise that there are states who elect their Supreme Court Justices? That is such a big mistake. If they have their jobs for life, they can make unpopular rulings. Since they can't be fired, they can even rule against government officials!
I'm saying it's the market's fault that the developer needs to rush or they'll be left behind.
You can't be serious! Regardless of how fast the market moves, it is by no means the market's responsibility to ensure that there will be less buggy code.
People love to blame someone else, especially when they can blame a generalized concept rather than an actual entity that can defend against such accusations. What you are saying is no better than the excuses from outraged parents who blame the media for their own shortcomings on raising their children.
They never seem to think, for whatever reason, that the job situation won't be the same in 4-8 years.
I was one of the few who did realize this. So, I went to college without knowing what I wanted to study. Computer classes were the only classes that I looked forward to. So, I decided to major in Computer Science. Then, the core classes were weighing me down. Throw in my decreasing health condition, and I found my self out of school working full time... making hamburgers. I was happy, but I needed more money and wanted to start a family. So, I moved to New Jersey and took a job that paid 2-3 times what I was making. I'm still happy, but then I look back on my fast food days and think "Damn! I had more money then than I do now!"
Maybe it's time to go back to school. At least part time, maybe. Then take a fast food job that I am over qualified for. Shove a degree in there face and demand to be hired "American Beauty" style. That would be fun.
Unlike mathematics, language has connotations and denotations. Simply put, it's the difference between how it is used and how it is supposed to be used. (Connotations are the additional meanings appended to the set of actual meanings.)
You might say "Where you at?" and people know what you mean, although you should have said, "Where are you?"
You might call your in-line skates "roller-blades," and everyone knows what you mean. If you said "in-line skates" many people would be baffled.
Sure, it's not "proper english," but language evolves. So, if I say, "get your ass in gear," I am not implying that you have a donkey with a manual transmission.
Nowhere in any of the above meanins is there an implication that "only" is plural.
A group of 69 trillion is still only one group. The group is companies in the world to have its own private subway system. This is not plural. Pop in a number and only becomes an adverb.
See your comment: "Without anyone or anything else; alone: room for only one passenger."
It can be done your way, but then it would lose the emphasis on the size of the group. Using "the few" would be vague, but it still works. My guess is that he didn't know the number but still wanted to emphasize the small size of the group.
It was one of the only. That is, there were only x, and this is one, all others make up the remaining x-1. Notice that x may be any integer greater than zero but less than the number of companies in the world. It would have made more sense if they put in a number, say "one of the only 69 trillion" or "one of the only two."
In the UK, there are the counties of Essex, Middlesex and Sussex.
These are also counties in New Jersey. There must be a sextillion words with the word "sex" in it. Maybe you will take your sextuplets to a sextet of cellos.
Sorry, my analogy was bad. I didn't intend to imply cracking. If law enforcement can get keys, so can a criminal. All you need is a single leak and the whole system is compromised. Security based on keys relies on the security of the keys, and hence the competency and honor of the key holder(s). As the number of key holders approaches infinity, the possibility of system compromise becomes inevitable.
Nope. No way, no how. There will definitely be keys for law enforcement to get into any file they want.
And if law enforcement can do it, so can a determined criminal. All you need is the knowledge on how they did it. The only difference between a lock smith and a lock picker is the use of the knowledge.
"All knowledge is for good. Only it's use can be good or evil." -Virgil(?) Battle for the Planet of the Apes
...I do not agree that being rewarded financially from free-market sales of medicines is a good thing.
Find someone who will spend a billion dollars trying to find a cure for some disease without the possiblity to get any of that billion back. If the US government funded healthcare entirely, there would be a point.
But they don't. So the only other option is profit (or a very generous entity).
until someone comes along who cuts the fat cats out of the profits
If the fat cats own the music, cutting out the fat cats would cut out the music.
Apparently, what you want to see are independent releases. These have historicly lacked the funding to promote and distribute with the same capacity as the fat cats. The internet has increased exposure. Apple has decreased distribution costs. You don't need your album on the shelf of every CD store in the country to make any money off your music.
I believe this is an open door for independents. No more climbing through the window. Now the real fight can begin.
MSEULA: "We own your ass, and can change the terms of owning your ass whenever we want. We reserve the right to own your ass in the future. Toute votre base sont appartiennent à nous. Vous êtes sur votre chemin à la destruction. Faites votre temps."
Yeah right, some navigator. How many years did it take him to get home? I don't think that would go very well in the benchmarks.
2008: "We would test the new Mozilla, too. Unfortunately, we are unable to upgrade since the old version is still loading the home page from five years ago."
That is actually a very good point. It puts it in perspective. Yes, travelling to the moon is a great accomplishment, but 186 thousand miles is not really far compared to how far we drive our cars in a matter of years. Since that distance hasn't improved for decades, the original post was valid. It really is a shame: I have travelled further on Earth than any single mission to space.
...you're kinda taking all the trust away, by not believing them...
Not believing? You don't even have to ask!
My oldest child is only 5, but I love it when she says, "You didn't saw me jump on the bed." It gives her the idea that I know what's going on even when I'm not there, so she will think again before jumping on the bed.
As for in school, it may encourage the kids to stop slacking off.
I don't know about you, but I wouldn't predict the fate of a technology based on M$ products. How about the fact that new PCs are not as neccisary since the old ones are working fine?
Also, the adaption of a new tech is going to have it's burst, but it is premature to say that one is replacing the other.
Slashdot Mirror
Dang, what a depressing ending. I was hoping for something more like, "... which will cause a chain reaction so great that it could disrupt the very fabric of the space-time continuum and destroy the entire universe!"
Okay, so she forgets her cellphone or the battery is dead and you go about your business forgetting to check the message after seeing it's "Unavailable".
...and she only decides to call you once (instead of "maybe he's in the bathroom") and she can't think of anybody else's phone number and there is no one around (maybe she's in a desert) and she used her last bit of change and can't remember how to dial collect and and and ...
The courts have taken, and will continue to take, decisions that are unpopular with the public at the time, based upon what the law states, not on public opinion.
Thank you so much for saying that! I'm glad there are people who understand how essential this is. Do you realise that there are states who elect their Supreme Court Justices? That is such a big mistake. If they have their jobs for life, they can make unpopular rulings. Since they can't be fired, they can even rule against government officials!
I'm saying it's the market's fault that the developer needs to rush or they'll be left behind.
You can't be serious! Regardless of how fast the market moves, it is by no means the market's responsibility to ensure that there will be less buggy code.
People love to blame someone else, especially when they can blame a generalized concept rather than an actual entity that can defend against such accusations. What you are saying is no better than the excuses from outraged parents who blame the media for their own shortcomings on raising their children.
They never seem to think, for whatever reason, that the job situation won't be the same in 4-8 years.
I was one of the few who did realize this. So, I went to college without knowing what I wanted to study. Computer classes were the only classes that I looked forward to. So, I decided to major in Computer Science. Then, the core classes were weighing me down. Throw in my decreasing health condition, and I found my self out of school working full time ... making hamburgers. I was happy, but I needed more money and wanted to start a family. So, I moved to New Jersey and took a job that paid 2-3 times what I was making. I'm still happy, but then I look back on my fast food days and think "Damn! I had more money then than I do now!"
Maybe it's time to go back to school. At least part time, maybe. Then take a fast food job that I am over qualified for. Shove a degree in there face and demand to be hired "American Beauty" style. That would be fun.
Wow, as early as four years ago? I have living ancestors dating back further than that.
Yup this is old news. We bought ours from 3Com
You'd hand over a dollar, but then as you've paid in full you've got no reason to hang around anymore...
Unless you want your receipt. How can you keep track of your money without your receipts?
I guess I'm just a special case.
Unlike mathematics, language has connotations and denotations. Simply put, it's the difference between how it is used and how it is supposed to be used. (Connotations are the additional meanings appended to the set of actual meanings.)
You might say "Where you at?" and people know what you mean, although you should have said, "Where are you?"
You might call your in-line skates "roller-blades," and everyone knows what you mean. If you said "in-line skates" many people would be baffled.
Sure, it's not "proper english," but language evolves. So, if I say, "get your ass in gear," I am not implying that you have a donkey with a manual transmission.
Nowhere in any of the above meanins is there an implication that "only" is plural.
A group of 69 trillion is still only one group. The group is companies in the world to have its own private subway system. This is not plural. Pop in a number and only becomes an adverb.
See your comment: "Without anyone or anything else; alone: room for only one passenger."
It can be done your way, but then it would lose the emphasis on the size of the group. Using "the few" would be vague, but it still works. My guess is that he didn't know the number but still wanted to emphasize the small size of the group.
It was one of the only. That is, there were only x, and this is one, all others make up the remaining x-1. Notice that x may be any integer greater than zero but less than the number of companies in the world. It would have made more sense if they put in a number, say "one of the only 69 trillion" or "one of the only two."
In the UK, there are the counties of Essex, Middlesex and Sussex.
These are also counties in New Jersey. There must be a sextillion words with the word "sex" in it. Maybe you will take your sextuplets to a sextet of cellos.
Sorry, my analogy was bad. I didn't intend to imply cracking. If law enforcement can get keys, so can a criminal. All you need is a single leak and the whole system is compromised. Security based on keys relies on the security of the keys, and hence the competency and honor of the key holder(s). As the number of key holders approaches infinity, the possibility of system compromise becomes inevitable.
Nope. No way, no how. There will definitely be keys for law enforcement to get into any file they want.
And if law enforcement can do it, so can a determined criminal. All you need is the knowledge on how they did it. The only difference between a lock smith and a lock picker is the use of the knowledge.
"All knowledge is for good. Only it's use can be good or evil." -Virgil(?) Battle for the Planet of the Apes
a solution gets developed... and a firm gets financially rewarded
Oh my god, it's capitalism! :)
Find someone who will spend a billion dollars trying to find a cure for some disease without the possiblity to get any of that billion back. If the US government funded healthcare entirely, there would be a point.
But they don't. So the only other option is profit (or a very generous entity).
until someone comes along who cuts the fat cats out of the profits
If the fat cats own the music, cutting out the fat cats would cut out the music.
Apparently, what you want to see are independent releases. These have historicly lacked the funding to promote and distribute with the same capacity as the fat cats. The internet has increased exposure. Apple has decreased distribution costs. You don't need your album on the shelf of every CD store in the country to make any money off your music.
I believe this is an open door for independents. No more climbing through the window. Now the real fight can begin.
I wish to append your "MSEULA in a nutshell."
MSEULA: "We own your ass, and can change the terms of owning your ass whenever we want. We reserve the right to own your ass in the future. Toute votre base sont appartiennent à nous. Vous êtes sur votre chemin à la destruction. Faites votre temps."
Not A, because a puppy requires too much maintenance.
Not B, a flower won't last more than a few days.
Not C, it could contain copyrighted material.
Although, when you use words like "pretty" and "sweety," you could convince me to buy a flower today, and replace it every time it dies.
legislation introduced ... will only end up making it harder to run a legitimate business
It is a shame that those pesky laws keep getting in the way of her legitimate business.
It is also a shame that legitimate means "being in compliance with the law."
Personally, I like FAKK2. My fiancee loves it too. And her kids think the character is her. "You gotta play mommy game today."
Odysseus was a navigator of sorts, wasn't he?
Yeah right, some navigator. How many years did it take him to get home? I don't think that would go very well in the benchmarks.
2008: "We would test the new Mozilla, too. Unfortunately, we are unable to upgrade since the old version is still loading the home page from five years ago."
That is actually a very good point. It puts it in perspective. Yes, travelling to the moon is a great accomplishment, but 186 thousand miles is not really far compared to how far we drive our cars in a matter of years. Since that distance hasn't improved for decades, the original post was valid. It really is a shame: I have travelled further on Earth than any single mission to space.
Not believing? You don't even have to ask!
My oldest child is only 5, but I love it when she says, "You didn't saw me jump on the bed." It gives her the idea that I know what's going on even when I'm not there, so she will think again before jumping on the bed.
As for in school, it may encourage the kids to stop slacking off.
I don't know about you, but I wouldn't predict the fate of a technology based on M$ products. How about the fact that new PCs are not as neccisary since the old ones are working fine?
Also, the adaption of a new tech is going to have it's burst, but it is premature to say that one is replacing the other.