See?? SEE??? You just CAN'T make this stuff up! Well, SCO can. But then again, it really seems as though a prerequisit for being hired there is borderline personality disorder, delusions of grandeur, or paranoid delusions.
I've got boderline personality disorder you insensitive clod!
At first there was no engine size limit at the Indy 500. There were a lot of accidents and fatalities. The powers-that-were wanted to slow the race down to make it safer. One of the things they did was put a limit on engine size.
Much to their suprise the cars with the smaller engines ended up going faster! This sequences of events has been used as an example of how constraints on the design process can sometimes result in better (in this case faster) designs.
The Perl language has built-in "taint-checking" enabled via the -T command line switch which causes Perl to automatically keep track of all information that possibly came from a user input and not allow any of it to do anything harmful (basically end up on a command line or in a file name).
... By itself it seems that this technology would draw about the same amount of input current, regardless of load....
A load on the output side a piezoelectric transformer will affect the current draw on the input side just like a magnetic transformer or any other resonating circuit.
The important thing is not the current but the power. Since this is an AC system the power flow depends upon more than just the magnitude of the voltage and current it also depends upon their relative phase. As more power is used on the output side, the current and the relative phase change on the input side to supply more power to the piezoelectric resonator.
The less technical but perhaps over-simple analogy is pushing a child on a swing. Once the child gets up to a certain height, you need to give a fixed amount of push to keep them swinging up to that same height. But if the child starts dragging her feet on the ground or using up her energy some other way then you will need to give her bigger pushes to keep her swinging to the same height.
Microsoft bundles a lot of stuff into Windows, into SQL Server, into the.Net framework ? if you?re looking to build a generic app and deploy it at an all-in price point, Windows is going to win hands down because you get so much bundled in.
Windows software is cheaper because it has so much bundled in???
It sounds like the logic used I Love Lucy where she loses money on each item sold but plans to make up for it by increasing the number of sales.
I vote for 16 functions not 8. Forget the high falutin' math for a moment.
With m=2 inputs there are 2^m = 4 possible states that need to be defined for each function when we write out a truth table. Here is an example:
A B OUT
0 0 0
0 1 1
1 0 1
1 1 0
Since each of the four output states can take any one of two possible values there will be a total of 2^(2^m) = 16 possible different functions.
In other words we can create 16 unique truth tables that contain 4 binary outputs.
* I have a marvelous proof of this but there isn't enough room in this footnote to write out all 16 four-digit binary numbers.
If SCO successfully attacks the GPL and overturns it on the basis of what Heiss is arguing, Microsoft's EULAs will also face legal challenges, [...]
But M$ knows that the GPL will not be overturned. They may be evil but the're not stupid (about the law at least). Their plan (if it exists) is to spread fud about Linux, GNU and the GPL.
They know they are going to eventually get steamrolled by GNU/Linux. The current SCO ploy is to slow down the steam roller. And for now it's working. They've bought themselves more time.
The movies have been a huge growth industry. For the last 10 to 20 years they've been making more and more big budget films and they've been able to make money off of them. The growth is tapering off and now they are starting to lose money.
Loss of sales through: word of mouth; text messages; the web; DVD's; whatever; these are all symptoms of the problem. The real solution will be less investment in films.
Or maybe just less accelerated investment in films.
While it is most assuredly true that parties in a contract have a duty to mitigate their damages, that mitigation duty hasn't been applied as far as I can tell to copyright infringement.
I think you've been blinded by SCO's smoke and mirrors. I know they change their story so often it is hard to keep up but the latest version by SCO is that their complaint is about the NUMA, etc. code developed by Sequent (now part of IBM). Even SCO agrees that IBM has the copyright on this code. SCO's case is not about their copyright being infringed it is about IBM's breach of contract.
How they get from there to licensing Linux is a beyond my understanding. I think their "logic" goes like this:
If IBM violated their contract (which is not true) then pigs can fly
Since pigs can fly then anything is true
Since anything is true then all your Linux belong to us
Slashdot Mirror
I've got boderline personality disorder you insensitive clod!
See some of the recent articles about SCOg for examples.
... and we even get to see pictures of it all on tv. I hear that videos of even nastier stuff will be coming out soon.
At first there was no engine size limit at the Indy 500. There were a lot of accidents and fatalities. The powers-that-were wanted to slow the race down to make it safer. One of the things they did was put a limit on engine size.
Much to their suprise the cars with the smaller engines ended up going faster! This sequences of events has been used as an example of how constraints on the design process can sometimes result in better (in this case faster) designs.
"You keep using that word!" the Spaniard snapped. " I don't think it means what you think it does."
These percentages are the fees Anderer expects to receive for setting up these deals.
** as in "toss into the trash can".
... for the State of the Union Speech.
From the yahoo story: One of his common setups involves a computer with a Pentium 4 processor, at least 512 gigabytes of memory ...
Someone might mug him to get that 512 gig of memory. Or even just to get the battery needed to power it.To heck with a suit I want Darl in jail.
Not to worry. Darl's suit will be plenty spoiled by the time he gets locked up for good.The Perl language has built-in "taint-checking" enabled via the -T command line switch which causes Perl to automatically keep track of all information that possibly came from a user input and not allow any of it to do anything harmful (basically end up on a command line or in a file name).
... not "brother-in-laws."
A load on the output side a piezoelectric transformer will affect the current draw on the input side just like a magnetic transformer or any other resonating circuit.
The important thing is not the current but the power. Since this is an AC system the power flow depends upon more than just the magnitude of the voltage and current it also depends upon their relative phase. As more power is used on the output side, the current and the relative phase change on the input side to supply more power to the piezoelectric resonator.
The less technical but perhaps over-simple analogy is pushing a child on a swing. Once the child gets up to a certain height, you need to give a fixed amount of push to keep them swinging up to that same height. But if the child starts dragging her feet on the ground or using up her energy some other way then you will need to give her bigger pushes to keep her swinging to the same height.
Careful. SCO might sue you for saying this.
Two glbs.
... has got a lotta 'splainen to do.
Windows software is cheaper because it has so much bundled in???
It sounds like the logic used I Love Lucy where she loses money on each item sold but plans to make up for it by increasing the number of sales.
A B OUT
Since each of the four output states can take any one of two possible values there will be a total of 2^(2^m) = 16 possible different functions. In other words we can create 16 unique truth tables that contain 4 binary outputs.0 0 0
0 1 1
1 0 1
1 1 0
* I have a marvelous proof of this but there isn't enough room in this footnote to write out all 16 four-digit binary numbers.
But M$ knows that the GPL will not be overturned. They may be evil but the're not stupid (about the law at least). Their plan (if it exists) is to spread fud about Linux, GNU and the GPL.
They know they are going to eventually get steamrolled by GNU/Linux. The current SCO ploy is to slow down the steam roller. And for now it's working. They've bought themselves more time.
A. Because all this SCO fud is being backed by a big corporation (M$).
The movies have been a huge growth industry. For the last 10 to 20 years they've been making more and more big budget films and they've been able to make money off of them. The growth is tapering off and now they are starting to lose money.
Loss of sales through: word of mouth; text messages; the web; DVD's; whatever; these are all symptoms of the problem. The real solution will be less investment in films. Or maybe just less accelerated investment in films.
In other words, after examining all of SCO's "evidence" this was the best argument their lawyers could come up with because there ain't no evidence.
I think you've been blinded by SCO's smoke and mirrors. I know they change their story so often it is hard to keep up but the latest version by SCO is that their complaint is about the NUMA, etc. code developed by Sequent (now part of IBM). Even SCO agrees that IBM has the copyright on this code. SCO's case is not about their copyright being infringed it is about IBM's breach of contract.
How they get from there to licensing Linux is a beyond my understanding. I think their "logic" goes like this: