Of course Europe is perfect. You know, all those Zombie computers were actually working with chips designed in the US, that's the explanation. And of course, were it not for that big US corporation named Microsoft, there surely would be more Open Source in Europe.
Don't believe me? Well, prove the opposite!;-)
[Note to humor-impaired readers: Please make sure your irony detector works correctly!]
"the oxytocin effect was no longer seen on the investors" just means that the people didn't behave differently with or without oxytocin. It doesn't tell what that behaviour was. Especially it doesn't tell you if the people gave up their money readily on the computer, just that those with oxytocin didn't give it up any more readily than those without.
Think about the following sentence: "In the night, the torch noticeably increased the brightness. During the day, the torch didn't seem to have any noticeable effect." Do you think it was especially dark during the day?
When the trustee was a computer, there was no difference between the two test groups.
Was the non-difference that the oxytocin-takers didn't trust the computer, or was it that even the non-takers trusted the computer so oxytocin couldn't make them any more trusting anyway?
Well, the best way to sell tinfoil probably is to spray an oxytocin-antagonist. Because the less they trust anyone, the more tinfoil they'll buy.
However, don't overdo that spraying: The mistrust may not be that strong that even tinfoil itself is mistrusted!
The first test of this substance ...
on
Trust in a Bottle
·
· Score: 1
... was done by the CIA on GWB: Before they said: "We have convincing proof that there are WMD in Iraq, trust us!", they secretly gave Bush a little dose of this stuff. And the later events clearly showed that it worked.
Moreover, having a GPL plugin installed also means that you cannot at the same time have a proprietary plugin installed, even if your browser's license would otherwise allow that (simple example, your browser might be BSD licensed, which is both compatible with GPLed and with proprietary plugins). For example, installing GPLFlash at the same time as a proprietary Java plugin wouldn't be allowed.
But then, couldn't they just make an extensive test suite and demand that no implementation may be claimed to play "flash" unless it passes that test suite completely?
BTW, how many people say "Oh, my browser just doesn't work" when they get to a page that doesn't display nicely? Actually they will say: "Oh, this web site is shitty, it doesn't even display correctly in the web browser."
However, independent of the license for the Flash specification I think having the name "Flash" in the project name is just asking for trouble (since "Flash" is surely trademarked).
Usually for decompression, you depend only on what came earlier, so while you cannot decompress anything after a missing part, you can decompress everthing before the first missing part. Especially I think this is true for the algorithm used in zip.
But even if not, if the formatting is done as CSS or XSLT, then it will be a separate file, and since the zip format compresses different files individually, this means that as soon as the complete data XML is read, it should be ready for decompression.
However, the whole thing may not work out anyway, because AFAIK zip archives have the directory at the end of the file. Since the directory contains crucial data like the file name, where a certain file begins in the archive, how long it is and which compression method was used on it, it may not be possible to reliably extract the data from a half-transmitted archive (OTOH, some of the missing data might be recoverable through trial and error, using the fact that the decompressed file has to be valid XML - but if the main XML file refers to an image names "Foo.jpg", and you don't have the directory entries, how would you find out which image it was?)
Now how are we supposed to talk about all our registered.com,.org,.(etc) domains all at once?
"yeah, just update the MX records for www.google.xxx will you?"
What about www.google.* or www.google.all?
However, I could think of a service google could offer at www.google.xxx - although I guess image.google.xxx might even be more of a success;-)
Re:What a steaming pile of disinformation
on
Are CRTs History?
·
· Score: 1
The phosphors in a CRT continue to glow after being hit with the electron beam. Take a photo of a monitor with a fast camera (1/1000 second or faster), and you will see a band of brightness instead of just one really bright pixel.
Indeed. And this is also the reason why 50Hz or 60Hz on a CRT monitor flicker much more than 50Hz or 60Hz on a TV: The phosphor on a TV has a longer glow. Monitors must have a shorter glow in order to support higher frequencies (the phosphor may not still glow the next time the electron beam crosses).
No, Goedel was the one who could not make a decision without contradicting himself (very bad when you're at court). The one who couldn't tell if he will ever be finished was Turing. Probably his problem was that he was too busy trying to find out if the people around him actually were transvestites.
How portable is your script? Does it run on every shell under the sun? What about DOS?
Is your script internationalized? Is it already localized to all languages?
Does your script gracefully handle different character encodings? Including EBCDIC?
What about windowing environments? Can your script say "Hello World" using an X server? Or on the Mac GUI? On Windows? If so, does it support native look&feel for all systems (including automatic adaption of the L&F to GNOME and KDE on Linux)?
You didn't think "Hello World" was a simple program to write, did you?
Also, Windows users are unlinekly to switch to Linux (even if they would consider the OS itself as superior) if they would have at the same time to switch away from most of their applications. Every OSS application someone uses instead of a proprietary one on Windows (but which exists also for Linux; there are of course also some Windows-only OSS programs) is one less barrier to switching over. A hypothetical Windows user using only OSS software on his Windows computer would probably have no problems at all to switch to Linux with his next computer.
Note that by switching one application at a time, the (re-)learning curve is relatively flat, as opposed to a "hard" switch where the OS and all apps are switched at the same time.
This is why both OSS on Windows and Wine on Linus should make more users switch to Linux (not now, but after some time). A scenario could e.g. go like the following:
Joe Windows User finds Firefox, starts to use it (on Windows, of course) from fear about virus attacks through IE.
Joe starts to like Firefox due to its features.
Joe finds out about OpenOffice and starts to use it (simply because it's cheaper).
Over time, Joe gets used to more and more OSS software on Windows (not because he has a special preference to OSS, but simply because it's there, it's free as in beer, and it does its job well).
Some Windows update (or Service Pack, or whatever) breaks some of his programs. He gets angry enough that he's considering alternatives. Or alternatively, he gets fed up with DRM mechanisms (e.g. he had to reinstall the OS, and suddenly couldn't access all his music any more). Or whatever happens that makes him ready to consider alternatives.
Now, he may find out that almost all the software he uses day-to-day runs also on Linux (because he switched to OSS apps gradually, although he probably wasn't even aware of that fact). Moreover, some other, Windows only apps can be used on Linux with the help of Wine. This enables him to switch to Linux without too much effort (which makes it at least more likely that he'll indeed swich).
After the switch to Linux, he might replace some or all of his remaining Windows programs, then running under Wine, with native Linux programs (including programs without a Windows equivalent).
Now, what will likely happen without OSS programs on Windows (and without Wine):
Joe Windows User uses closed-source Windows software for all he does.
Joe replaces this or that program with a better one, maybe even with a free-as-in-beer one, but it's still most likely a Windows only program.
Now Joe gets fed up about Windows (for the same reason as above), and considers alternatives.
However he finds out that all his beloved software doesnt run on anything but Windows (or maybe some runs also on Mac, but then, he's doesn't want to change his hardware just now).
Due to that fact he just remains an unhappy Windows user.
Of course, to get the first scenario true, OSS must not only be available on Windows, but must also be comparable to or even superior than the closed source alternatives.
Hmmm... this gives me an idea. You can extend a file from the shell by using the >> operator on it. Maybe I might be able to double my memory for free by just doing cat/dev/kmem >>/dev/kmem.
This technique could have other uses as well. Your hard disk is too small? Well, double your hard disk space with cat/dev/hda >>/dev/hda. You can even make a floppy as large as your hard disk by typing cat/dev/hda >>/dev/fd0!
Well, actually I think I'll make my main memory and disks grow infinitely:
Well, let's see if I can get a cheap Karma, too:-) (However I guess it will just end up Funny with several Overrateds...)
GNOME (GNU Network Object Model Environment) is a desktop environment.
GNU of course is short for GNU's Not Unix, so the second-level expansion of GNOME is GNU's Not Unix Network Object Model Environment. Which indeed is a true statement, since GNU indeed is no Unix Network Object Model Environment.
Of course recursive expansion of GNU does no good. GNU's Not Unix Not Unix doesn't make much sense. GNU's Not Unix Not Unix Network Object Model Environment doesn't sound any better.
BTW, are there any GNU vulnerabilities in the Linux kernel? You know, I'd not like to have a wounded GNU in my computer. It would only give me trouble with the animal welfare activists. Of course DWARF vulnerabilities could cause trouble with Amnesty International, so it's also something you really want to check.
Slashdot Mirror
Of course Europe is perfect. You know, all those Zombie computers were actually working with chips designed in the US, that's the explanation. And of course, were it not for that big US corporation named Microsoft, there surely would be more Open Source in Europe.
;-)
Don't believe me? Well, prove the opposite!
[Note to humor-impaired readers: Please make sure your irony detector works correctly!]
"the oxytocin effect was no longer seen on the investors" just means that the people didn't behave differently with or without oxytocin. It doesn't tell what that behaviour was. Especially it doesn't tell you if the people gave up their money readily on the computer, just that those with oxytocin didn't give it up any more readily than those without.
Think about the following sentence: "In the night, the torch noticeably increased the brightness. During the day, the torch didn't seem to have any noticeable effect." Do you think it was especially dark during the day?
Was the non-difference that the oxytocin-takers didn't trust the computer, or was it that even the non-takers trusted the computer so oxytocin couldn't make them any more trusting anyway?
Well, the best way to sell tinfoil probably is to spray an oxytocin-antagonist. Because the less they trust anyone, the more tinfoil they'll buy.
However, don't overdo that spraying: The mistrust may not be that strong that even tinfoil itself is mistrusted!
... was done by the CIA on GWB: Before they said: "We have convincing proof that there are WMD in Iraq, trust us!", they secretly gave Bush a little dose of this stuff. And the later events clearly showed that it worked.
;-)
\end{conspiracy theory}
Of course, if the specific delivery mechanism works, it should be very easy to sell it: Just apply it.
Moreover, having a GPL plugin installed also means that you cannot at the same time have a proprietary plugin installed, even if your browser's license would otherwise allow that (simple example, your browser might be BSD licensed, which is both compatible with GPLed and with proprietary plugins). For example, installing GPLFlash at the same time as a proprietary Java plugin wouldn't be allowed.
But then, couldn't they just make an extensive test suite and demand that no implementation may be claimed to play "flash" unless it passes that test suite completely?
BTW, how many people say "Oh, my browser just doesn't work" when they get to a page that doesn't display nicely? Actually they will say: "Oh, this web site is shitty, it doesn't even display correctly in the web browser."
However, independent of the license for the Flash specification I think having the name "Flash" in the project name is just asking for trouble (since "Flash" is surely trademarked).
Usually for decompression, you depend only on what came earlier, so while you cannot decompress anything after a missing part, you can decompress everthing before the first missing part. Especially I think this is true for the algorithm used in zip.
But even if not, if the formatting is done as CSS or XSLT, then it will be a separate file, and since the zip format compresses different files individually, this means that as soon as the complete data XML is read, it should be ready for decompression.
However, the whole thing may not work out anyway, because AFAIK zip archives have the directory at the end of the file. Since the directory contains crucial data like the file name, where a certain file begins in the archive, how long it is and which compression method was used on it, it may not be possible to reliably extract the data from a half-transmitted archive (OTOH, some of the missing data might be recoverable through trial and error, using the fact that the decompressed file has to be valid XML - but if the main XML file refers to an image names "Foo.jpg", and you don't have the directory entries, how would you find out which image it was?)
What about www.google.* or www.google.all?
However, I could think of a service google could offer at www.google.xxx - although I guess image.google.xxx might even be more of a success
Indeed. And this is also the reason why 50Hz or 60Hz on a CRT monitor flicker much more than 50Hz or 60Hz on a TV: The phosphor on a TV has a longer glow. Monitors must have a shorter glow in order to support higher frequencies (the phosphor may not still glow the next time the electron beam crosses).
No, Goedel was the one who could not make a decision without contradicting himself (very bad when you're at court). The one who couldn't tell if he will ever be finished was Turing. Probably his problem was that he was too busy trying to find out if the people around him actually were transvestites.
According to the summary, the software of the computer currently is vaporware. Therefore DNF should run just fine on it.
You mean version 9.0 will incorporate Emacs?
So where's the difference to other software patents?
I've got a better idea. I'll patent games that are not actually fun. Then every time someone makes a bad game, he infringes my patent and must pay. :-)
Sorry, but I've patented moving along when there's nothing to see here ...
Are you sure?
How portable is your script? Does it run on every shell under the sun? What about DOS?
Is your script internationalized? Is it already localized to all languages?
Does your script gracefully handle different character encodings? Including EBCDIC?
What about windowing environments? Can your script say "Hello World" using an X server? Or on the Mac GUI? On Windows? If so, does it support native look&feel for all systems (including automatic adaption of the L&F to GNOME and KDE on Linux)?
You didn't think "Hello World" was a simple program to write, did you?
I didn't know that countries today can be that small
SCNR
Note that by switching one application at a time, the (re-)learning curve is relatively flat, as opposed to a "hard" switch where the OS and all apps are switched at the same time.
This is why both OSS on Windows and Wine on Linus should make more users switch to Linux (not now, but after some time). A scenario could e.g. go like the following:
Now, what will likely happen without OSS programs on Windows (and without Wine):
Of course, to get the first scenario true, OSS must not only be available on Windows, but must also be comparable to or even superior than the closed source alternatives.
So what? I've got several. One for my processor, one for my graphics card, one for my power supply, and one for me
Hmmm ... this gives me an idea. You can extend a file from the shell by using the >> operator on it. Maybe I might be able to double my memory for free by just doing cat /dev/kmem >> /dev/kmem.
/dev/hda >> /dev/hda. You can even make a floppy as large as your hard disk by typing cat /dev/hda >> /dev/fd0!
/dev/zero >> /dev/kmem & cat /dev/zero >> /dev/hda &
:-)
This technique could have other uses as well. Your hard disk is too small? Well, double your hard disk space with cat
Well, actually I think I'll make my main memory and disks grow infinitely:
cat
SCNR
Well, let's see if I can get a cheap Karma, too :-) (However I guess it will just end up Funny with several Overrateds ...)
GNOME (GNU Network Object Model Environment) is a desktop environment.
GNU of course is short for GNU's Not Unix, so the second-level expansion of GNOME is GNU's Not Unix Network Object Model Environment. Which indeed is a true statement, since GNU indeed is no Unix Network Object Model Environment.
Of course recursive expansion of GNU does no good. GNU's Not Unix Not Unix doesn't make much sense. GNU's Not Unix Not Unix Network Object Model Environment doesn't sound any better.
BTW, are there any GNU vulnerabilities in the Linux kernel? You know, I'd not like to have a wounded GNU in my computer. It would only give me trouble with the animal welfare activists. Of course DWARF vulnerabilities could cause trouble with Amnesty International, so it's also something you really want to check.
I thought ISO was short for International Standard Organization?