13256278887989457651018865901401704640 is mine - don't touch it - I warn ya ! Nor do you touch 718624318471594843*2^64 + 15582831591453788352 which is also mine. Mine MINE MINE.
In fact any arithmetic expression or part thereof that evaluates to 13256278887989457651018865901401704640 is mine too !!! - oh wait...
13256278887989457651018865901401704640 is mine mine mine it's like an 718624318471594843*2^64 + 15582831591453788352 which is also mine.
Those sequences of 8887 are especially nice and to finish on 640, well WHO needs more than that.
I give you permission to use it under the terms of the GPLv3 or a separate license where you agree to pay me 95% of all revenue.
13256278887989457651018865901401704640 is mine
on
Censoring a Number
·
· Score: 1
13256278887989457651018865901401704640 is mine and I release it under the GPLv3. Anyone who wishes to use use it but not under the terms of the GPLv3 can do so if they pay me all of the revenue their company makes for all time.
I also copyright the following formula:
718624318471594843*2^64 + 15582831591453788352
And the component numbers (except for 2 and 64) and release it under the same terms.
... a push for software patents; so people couldn't copy the logic.
.. and that's been playing out swimmingly... NOT.
There are very few software patents that I see merit their existence. Most I have seen are simply "idea" patents which goes against the entire idea of patents.
Try reading, say, anything from the entire climatological literature over the last 30 years. The fact that you choose to dismiss it does not make it any less credible.
I dismiss what ? I have yet to dismiss anything as far as I can tell.
Obviously, you can't interpret what you read so I am mistaken in asking you to connect the dots.
As much as you want to paint deniers as noble and daring persecuted revolutionaries, the fact is, the existence of anthropogenic global warming is by now well established, and their counterarguments are not credible.
Show me your irrefutable facts of the existence of anthropogenic global warming.
Does anyone debate that we humans are at least partially responsible for global warming? If so, we should really try to back off in order to prevent human extinction.
If you have proof that makes you so damn certain, please show us. I think you're being arrogant to think that the human race is so powerful that it can change the world so dramatically without real evidence. To me, the jury is still out. If you can tell me why the glaciers on Mars should be receding while the glaciers on Earth should not, I am all ears. However, to push the panic button and waste all our energies on reducing CO2 levels when we should be moving coastal communities to safer, higher areas is also a gross error.
I don't know how much the global climate can change before we as humans either need to evolve or die off. Stephen Hawking believes that we need to find a way to get off this planet as soon as possible in order for the human race to live on, and if global warming has anything to do with that, we better start doing something useful about it rather than having long, esoteric political debates about who or what is causing global warming or whether it even exists.
Either way, if the climate change is irreversible, we had better start planning for it.
It is founded by probably the most amazing guitar musicians of our time.
candyrat.com has a nice interface giving you the ability to preview (albeit at a preview bitrate) the tracks for 30 seconds.
They also offer CD's of some other artists.
It it the only store I have bought music from since the RIAA started they terror campaign.
I am very reluctant to buy any product that has DRM. I won't touch iTunes, bu-ray, hd-dvd, hdmi etc.
It might be hypocritical since I actually worked on products that enforce DRM, however from a marketing sense, I coulc not work if I didn't do so. Whenever I was asked, I told customers that DRM would always be broken because all the components to decipher the content was available at the player. I also said that the value chain breaks down with DRM and interoperability between different products breaks down because corps want their market advantage and so they have no interest in co-operating with DRM and hence interoperability will always fail between the corps. Since at least '99 I was told by others that I was not very helpful in the sales cycle of our products.
Hence the customer to our systems (labels/riaa/mpaa) is always right even if the customer is shooting itself in the foot.
I bought the Samsung player exactly for that reason. OGG support was a great thing - at 64kbps it sounds better than a 128kbps mp3 (IMHO). That means I can stick twice the music on the player!
After reading some of the posts on how it takes hours to get a successful activation after a MB change (or some other components), it appears that clearly that MS is not holding up their end of the EULA bargain.
I think the EFF or some rabid lawyers can easy extract a judgement from a judge against Microsoft on this one.
It's pretty clear. MS says they'll allow you to do somthing which they make nigh impossible for some peaople or make techs spend hours on the phone (which means money to the customer) and many just buy another copy which means more money to MS. MS has no incentive to help you because the less they help you the more money they make. It's a real scam.
On top of that, MS IS already convicted as a monoploy so even the smell of somthing improper like forcing customers to dish more cash than they expected. Acts like RICO come to mind. If I can show that 5% of customers have this problem, that means that MS would owe billions to it's customers and probably trebble because it's probably easy to show that they do it on purpose if you can find some good examples of badly treated customers or OEMS.
On top of that, the FUD alone of a lawsuit like this one would be a big problem for MS. In this case the actual consumer gets to feel like it's getting a bad deal and will probably cause more people to look for alternatives.
When you ask a programmer "are you done ?", it is possible to verify the answer by simply using what he's built.
In many cases yes, in some cases no. Often the level of specification does not go into the level that is needed to specify everything and so lingering and expensive issues may remain and no-one will be able to tell until the most important customer ends up using the product and it goes down in flames.
As for programmers making business decisions, they're paid to do that within the scope of their job. I have never seen a programmer ink a business deal or choose a bank or leasing company. However, I have seen too many C*O's create an overconstrained situation where there is no winnable result.
When you ask a carpenter "are you done ?", almost anyone can verify the answer just by looking at it.
When you ask a programmer "are you done ?", it is difficult to verify the answer.
There are so many ways to accomplish a goal in software that you need a number of very expensive controls in place to validate the result. Very few managers know how to do it and very few C*O's are willing to spend the money to put in place even the minimal control measures even though I can say in every case where ther were good controls put in place the benefits far outweighed the costs.
This leads to a plethora of problems that I won't repeat here but I know too well.
Eventually everything breaks down when the C*O's start making technical decisions that they are not qualified to make and it's all downhill from there.
In California at least, in most circumstances the company is required to pay your legal fees, including hiring those fees your "own" lawyer for cases where you're defending against a compaint that originated from doing your job.
I can say I'll never buy from itunes as long as they have DRM.
All the music I have purchased over the last 2 years has been from Candyrat records. Here you will find some very impressive artists, not the run-o-the-mill, overhyped bands and singers. They feature "NO DRM", high bitrate MP3's (I'd prefer OGG but I need to bitch about it) and many albums have an electronic equivalent of the album cover.
Why would I possibly consider tieing my hands with DRM or itunes even ?
if I should lie about my past or put down the truth
Do not lie about your past. If anything, don't fill in the form and ask to speak to the HR person and tell them you want to speak about their policies. Whatever you do, do not lie.
Je suis a bit fromaged off avec votre decision to compromise la communauté de source ouvert avec le contrat avec le diable. Je reckon vous must have d'autres choses in La Belle Novell itself pour donner ? Unixware ? Votre premier fils ? votre soul, puet etre ?
Frappez le crows avec stones, Sport! La guerre contre m$ n'est pas fini. We need ce contrat about as beacoup as poisson need les bicyclettes.
Un autre point, cobber. Votre histoire de produit dev isn't tres flash, consisting, n'est-ce pas, of produits the likes of Unixware, WordPerfect, Quattro Pro, et Dos 7. Un contrat won't change le tradition. Have vous forgotten?
Reconsider, mon ami, otherwise le produits de votre future won't matérialiser pour vous. Votre chums don't want that.
Adapted from a famous open letter to Jaques Chirac from an Australian journalist protesting the nuke tests in La Pacifque.
The reverse is alsio true. There number of environmental policies/laws that make alot of money for "environmental" professions ( "contamination experts", "hygenists") that provide little or no true value. When you point out the scientific discrepancies, they will all agree with you that it sucks to be needeing to spend alot of money on things that will more than likely never be an issue to anyone, but none of them speak out because they're "in the money". Others that speak out are likened to "polluting prifiteering corps" !
I didn't read the article however I have seen an increasing technophobia with no basis in fact.
The amount of energy pushed out bu 802.11a/b/g networks is miniscule and it's almost background level when you consider cell phones, TW transmissions, RADAR and a whole host of other technologies that have been in use for much much longer.
Many of the environmentalist policies and acts legislated by governments provide little or no real benefits.
As one friend of mine said - it's like putting a bandage on a wooden leg....
NTFS has supported hard links as distinct from "Junctions" and "Junctions" are not really hard links, they're just very bad implementations of a symlink which is really closer to a mount point, because thats what junctions are meant for originally anyway.
Re:Huh? Symlinks were in XP/2000 NTFS all the time
on
Vista's Limited Symlinks
·
· Score: 4, Informative
At first blush you would think so, but the semantics of a windows NTFS symlink is more like a mount point.
Firstly, you can't use normal "commands" to create/delete NTFS symlinks. The collection of system calls to create a symlink are badly documented and incomplete.
The big differences are (from memory):
If you attempt to delete an NTFS symlink using normal "remove" system calls, you delete the file being linked to.
If you rename a symlink, you're renaming the file being linked to.
There are no "relative" symlinks (i.e. ln -s x y)
In *nix, if xxx is a symlink to a directory then xxx refers to the symlink while xxx/ refers to the location linked to
... probably more, I can't think of anything else right now, I'll go do some more research later.
So while there is a similar function called a "reparse point" it is more like "mount" that it is like a a true UNIX symlink.
Also, most of the Windows tools just don't deal with link (hardlinks or symlinks). If you do a hardlink from one file to another and check to see disk usage of a directory, the file is counted twice. Most unix tools (du etc) will not count hardlinked files twice and symlinks are counted as the disk space the symlink uses not the file it points to.
Symlinks are a very powerful tool and are very mature in the *nix world. Windows is just simply way behind on this one.
Slashdot Mirror
Trust me on this, make them keep their first born, nuthin' but trubbel, I tell ya
13256278887989457651018865901401704640 is mine - don't touch it - I warn ya ! Nor do you touch 718624318471594843*2^64 + 15582831591453788352 which is also mine. Mine MINE MINE.
In fact any arithmetic expression or part thereof that evaluates to 13256278887989457651018865901401704640 is mine too !!! - oh wait ...
13256278887989457651018865901401704640 is mine mine mine it's like an 718624318471594843*2^64 + 15582831591453788352 which is also mine.
Those sequences of 8887 are especially nice and to finish on 640, well WHO needs more than that.
I give you permission to use it under the terms of the GPLv3 or a separate license where you agree to pay me 95% of all revenue.
13256278887989457651018865901401704640 is mine and I release it under the GPLv3. Anyone who wishes to use use it but not under the terms of the GPLv3 can do so if they pay me all of the revenue their company makes for all time. I also copyright the following formula: 718624318471594843*2^64 + 15582831591453788352 And the component numbers (except for 2 and 64) and release it under the same terms.
.. and that's been playing out swimmingly ... NOT.
There are very few software patents that I see merit their existence. Most I have seen are simply "idea" patents which goes against the entire idea of patents.
Is "Order Recieved" an option for sorting by time received ?
My standard response is - I have. I only buy from non RIAA affiliated artists.
I especially like candyrat. These artists are truly amazing.
I dismiss what ? I have yet to dismiss anything as far as I can tell.
Obviously, you can't interpret what you read so I am mistaken in asking you to connect the dots.
plonk
Consider me ignorant. Please connect all the dots that make you come to that conclusion.
Show me your irrefutable facts of the existence of anthropogenic global warming.
If the train is coming, you'd better get off the tracks.
It sounds to me that global warming is inevitable and we might need to plan on moving coastal communities.
If you have proof that makes you so damn certain, please show us. I think you're being arrogant to think that the human race is so powerful that it can change the world so dramatically without real evidence. To me, the jury is still out. If you can tell me why the glaciers on Mars should be receding while the glaciers on Earth should not, I am all ears. However, to push the panic button and waste all our energies on reducing CO2 levels when we should be moving coastal communities to safer, higher areas is also a gross error.
Either way, if the climate change is irreversible, we had better start planning for it.
It is founded by probably the most amazing guitar musicians of our time.
candyrat.com has a nice interface giving you the ability to preview (albeit at a preview bitrate) the tracks for 30 seconds.
They also offer CD's of some other artists.
It it the only store I have bought music from since the RIAA started they terror campaign.
I am very reluctant to buy any product that has DRM. I won't touch iTunes, bu-ray, hd-dvd, hdmi etc.
It might be hypocritical since I actually worked on products that enforce DRM, however from a marketing sense, I coulc not work if I didn't do so. Whenever I was asked, I told customers that DRM would always be broken because all the components to decipher the content was available at the player. I also said that the value chain breaks down with DRM and interoperability between different products breaks down because corps want their market advantage and so they have no interest in co-operating with DRM and hence interoperability will always fail between the corps. Since at least '99 I was told by others that I was not very helpful in the sales cycle of our products.
Hence the customer to our systems (labels/riaa/mpaa) is always right even if the customer is shooting itself in the foot.
Oh well.
I bought the Samsung player exactly for that reason. OGG support was a great thing - at 64kbps it sounds better than a 128kbps mp3 (IMHO). That means I can stick twice the music on the player!
IANAL.
After reading some of the posts on how it takes hours to get a successful activation after a MB change (or some other components), it appears that clearly that MS is not holding up their end of the EULA bargain.
I think the EFF or some rabid lawyers can easy extract a judgement from a judge against Microsoft on this one.
It's pretty clear. MS says they'll allow you to do somthing which they make nigh impossible for some peaople or make techs spend hours on the phone (which means money to the customer) and many just buy another copy which means more money to MS. MS has no incentive to help you because the less they help you the more money they make. It's a real scam.
On top of that, MS IS already convicted as a monoploy so even the smell of somthing improper like forcing customers to dish more cash than they expected. Acts like RICO come to mind. If I can show that 5% of customers have this problem, that means that MS would owe billions to it's customers and probably trebble because it's probably easy to show that they do it on purpose if you can find some good examples of badly treated customers or OEMS.
On top of that, the FUD alone of a lawsuit like this one would be a big problem for MS. In this case the actual consumer gets to feel like it's getting a bad deal and will probably cause more people to look for alternatives.
In many cases yes, in some cases no. Often the level of specification does not go into the level that is needed to specify everything and so lingering and expensive issues may remain and no-one will be able to tell until the most important customer ends up using the product and it goes down in flames.
As for programmers making business decisions, they're paid to do that within the scope of their job. I have never seen a programmer ink a business deal or choose a bank or leasing company. However, I have seen too many C*O's create an overconstrained situation where there is no winnable result.
When you ask a carpenter "are you done ?", almost anyone can verify the answer just by looking at it.
When you ask a programmer "are you done ?", it is difficult to verify the answer.
There are so many ways to accomplish a goal in software that you need a number of very expensive controls in place to validate the result. Very few managers know how to do it and very few C*O's are willing to spend the money to put in place even the minimal control measures even though I can say in every case where ther were good controls put in place the benefits far outweighed the costs.
This leads to a plethora of problems that I won't repeat here but I know too well.
Eventually everything breaks down when the C*O's start making technical decisions that they are not qualified to make and it's all downhill from there.
In California at least, in most circumstances the company is required to pay your legal fees, including hiring those fees your "own" lawyer for cases where you're defending against a compaint that originated from doing your job.
I can say I'll never buy from itunes as long as they have DRM.
All the music I have purchased over the last 2 years has been from Candyrat records. Here you will find some very impressive artists, not the run-o-the-mill, overhyped bands and singers. They feature "NO DRM", high bitrate MP3's (I'd prefer OGG but I need to bitch about it) and many albums have an electronic equivalent of the album cover.
Why would I possibly consider tieing my hands with DRM or itunes even ?
Do not lie about your past. If anything, don't fill in the form and ask to speak to the HR person and tell them you want to speak about their policies. Whatever you do, do not lie.
Cher Ron,
Je suis a bit fromaged off avec votre decision to compromise la communauté de source ouvert avec le contrat avec le diable. Je reckon vous must have d'autres choses in La Belle Novell itself pour donner ? Unixware ? Votre premier fils ? votre soul, puet etre ?
Frappez le crows avec stones, Sport! La guerre contre m$ n'est pas fini. We need ce contrat about as beacoup as poisson need les bicyclettes.
Un autre point, cobber. Votre histoire de produit dev isn't tres flash, consisting, n'est-ce pas, of produits the likes of Unixware, WordPerfect, Quattro Pro, et Dos 7. Un contrat won't change le tradition. Have vous forgotten?
Reconsider, mon ami, otherwise le produits de votre future won't matérialiser pour vous. Votre chums don't want that.
Adapted from a famous open letter to Jaques Chirac from an Australian journalist protesting the nuke tests in La Pacifque.
The reverse is alsio true. There number of environmental policies/laws that make alot of money for "environmental" professions ( "contamination experts", "hygenists") that provide little or no true value. When you point out the scientific discrepancies, they will all agree with you that it sucks to be needeing to spend alot of money on things that will more than likely never be an issue to anyone, but none of them speak out because they're "in the money". Others that speak out are likened to "polluting prifiteering corps" !
Ya. We're so much better off. NOT.
The amount of energy pushed out bu 802.11a/b/g networks is miniscule and it's almost background level when you consider cell phones, TW transmissions, RADAR and a whole host of other technologies that have been in use for much much longer.
Many of the environmentalist policies and acts legislated by governments provide little or no real benefits.
As one friend of mine said - it's like putting a bandage on a wooden leg....
NTFS has supported hard links as distinct from "Junctions" and "Junctions" are not really hard links, they're just very bad implementations of a symlink which is really closer to a mount point, because thats what junctions are meant for originally anyway.
At first blush you would think so, but the semantics of a windows NTFS symlink is more like a mount point.
Firstly, you can't use normal "commands" to create/delete NTFS symlinks. The collection of system calls to create a symlink are badly documented and incomplete.
The big differences are (from memory):
So while there is a similar function called a "reparse point" it is more like "mount" that it is like a a true UNIX symlink.
Also, most of the Windows tools just don't deal with link (hardlinks or symlinks). If you do a hardlink from one file to another and check to see disk usage of a directory, the file is counted twice. Most unix tools (du etc) will not count hardlinked files twice and symlinks are counted as the disk space the symlink uses not the file it points to.
Symlinks are a very powerful tool and are very mature in the *nix world. Windows is just simply way behind on this one.