It didn't say that videogames improve eyesight. It said action games improve eye/mind co-ordination, the ability to track the motion of several objects at once. Objects don't need to be fully focused for you to see that they are moving, as long as you can distinguish them from the background.
a man was tackled and arrested by the Air Marshals for *wanting* to go to the bathroom while the seat belt sign was on. He had asked the flight attendant repeatedly to let him go, but never actually went...
It really depends on your intended field of study. What would you use a PDA/laptop for when studying fine art? I'd think just for general consideration, a recorder (tape or digital or whatever you like), a notepad, and something to keep track of contacts and assignments. I liked using a PDA because it has an alarm on it. I think I'd find typing too slow and noisy to take good notes in class, and writing notes on a PDA would be a fast track to nerve damage before graduating. Having a net enabled laptop in class for discussion oriented classes would be good, I think, for looking up facts and such.
Forgive me for being obtuse, but how does that make it safer? You still had your car stolen, what if the thief decided to kill you so you couldn't report it? Your response shows this can be used for swifter resolution of a crime already committed, but I thought the general tone was they could use this to prevent crime, and keep criminals off the road.
How does it keep you safer? I would guess a convicted felon who registers his/her license plate can be kept track of after release. But as many people have pointed out, what will it do to stop the person who just stole someone's car in the recent enough past that the system doesn't have it registered stolen yet? It will only be useful in the sense that people with a history of criminal activity who have started playing by the rules will have a new roadblock to being accepted back into productive society, figuratively and literally. Doesn't sound that helpful to me.
I've read that in terms of compatibility with consumer dvd players, the Pioner DVR-A05 is the way to go. If you're concerned about format, I'm pretty sure Sony and HP both make recorders that handle all four.
I didn't see mention of a fine in either the babel translation or in the english version. Can anybody comment on what gives LinuxTag the ability to fine SCO?
You answer your own question. Justifying the purchase would just be proving that it is the correct tool. I think justification should always be given for a purchase made with taxpayer money, whether it's for proprietary software, open source software, or a new soda machine.
In the US, you can buy CDR Audio disks for like $10. The price markup vs a regular data CDR is the tax to offset the "lost revenue". RIAA still doesn't like p2p though, nor do they like manufacturers making equipment that can copy the CDs.
I do want the music, I just don't want the product the RIAA is pushing. By stealing the music, I would be arming the RIAA to go to Congress to push for stiffer legislation to protect their product. I buy used CDs, because afaik, the RIAA doesn't get royalties from it.
I didn't say p2p networks are to blame, I said stealing music is the wrong response. I don't blame kazaa for lost record sales, I agree that it is a flawed argument, but it's one that Congress listens to. I'm not defending the RIAA's actions, I'm challenging the reactions that just feed the fire ("fuck RIAA, download your music for free").
I disagree that laws should be enforced differently for different people. Stealing is stealing. I agree that the lawsuits coming out the RIAA are rediculous.
By pirating music you're demonstrating that there is demand for it. Since it is currently illegal to pirate music, you're just arming the RIAA with data that says people want the music but would rather steal it. This is why they start treating customers like criminals instead of customers. You're giving them data to present to congress to push for more redundant laws which do nothing but erode our rights as consumers. When you get slapped with a 7+ digit fine from the RIAA for stealing, don't come crying to people who actually care about ethically stnading up for their rights. To get the RIAA to change their ways, we need to show them there's no demand for their product (there's more to the product then the content alone), and that means don't buy it, and don't steal it.
The ability to put a CD in your stereo and enjoy the content should not be compared to the ability to eat. They're on totally different levels, one is a luxury (albeit an easily obtainable one), the other is a basic human right. I don't have to buy new CDs to listen to good new music. I can buy them used, go to concerts, and make my own.
Uh, isn't SCO claiming patent infringement by IBM? And now that SuSe and RedHat are selling distributions which uses that code from IBM which infringes on their patents, SCO is going after them too, for patent infringement?
That's nonsense. You can implement the same feature a different way (different algorithm perhaps) then what is patented. Otherwise the patent would be too broad and should be stricken.
What on earth do they hope to accomplish? Getting rid of Linux vendors? That's futile, since the source is already available on the net for free. Chunks of cash from Linux vendors? That would be stupid too. If they are awarded a settlement, it would likely result in bankrupting the targeted vendors. But that wouldn't remove them from the marketplace, since the distributions are, once again, already available on the net for free. Do they think that former customers will suddenly come to them? That's arrogant. The hackers would find out through the course of the trials what parts of the Linux kernel, if any, violate patents, and re-implement such that it's no longer in violation. The only thing SCO can hope to do is temporarily dispose of popular Linux vendors and piss off the very demographic that might ever be interested in their product.
I guess PHB's can start using them now that they can pile up documents in large random.. uh.. piles, all over their desktops, just like their desks and shelves.
I'd like to know how many other UNIX sysems implement these kinds of technologies, except OpenBSD. How well do they compare? Again, I'd like to know how many other UNIX systems implement these safegaurds, except OpenBSD.
Slashdot Mirror
Like when priests say "Forever and ever." I think forever pretty much covers it. "You got anything sportier, like a tuna?"
ps - that second quote is a hint to whom I'm making reference to.
But he already said one of the three NICs goes to a switch, and the poster you replied to included that in his quote of the original post.
It didn't say that videogames improve eyesight. It said action games improve eye/mind co-ordination, the ability to track the motion of several objects at once. Objects don't need to be fully focused for you to see that they are moving, as long as you can distinguish them from the background.
I built the first one at the Institute for Advanced Technology, they've since built two more. Saves them money over using time on the Crays at the Pickle Research Campus.
If he never got up and went, how was he tackled?
It really depends on your intended field of study. What would you use a PDA/laptop for when studying fine art? I'd think just for general consideration, a recorder (tape or digital or whatever you like), a notepad, and something to keep track of contacts and assignments. I liked using a PDA because it has an alarm on it. I think I'd find typing too slow and noisy to take good notes in class, and writing notes on a PDA would be a fast track to nerve damage before graduating. Having a net enabled laptop in class for discussion oriented classes would be good, I think, for looking up facts and such.
Think joke beanhead, where people laugh with the person making it.
Forgive me for being obtuse, but how does that make it safer? You still had your car stolen, what if the thief decided to kill you so you couldn't report it? Your response shows this can be used for swifter resolution of a crime already committed, but I thought the general tone was they could use this to prevent crime, and keep criminals off the road.
Those must be some hefty hand gestures to be understood by a blind person. Do they involve the sound of one hand clapping?
How does it keep you safer? I would guess a convicted felon who registers his/her license plate can be kept track of after release. But as many people have pointed out, what will it do to stop the person who just stole someone's car in the recent enough past that the system doesn't have it registered stolen yet? It will only be useful in the sense that people with a history of criminal activity who have started playing by the rules will have a new roadblock to being accepted back into productive society, figuratively and literally. Doesn't sound that helpful to me.
I've read that in terms of compatibility with consumer dvd players, the Pioner DVR-A05 is the way to go. If you're concerned about format, I'm pretty sure Sony and HP both make recorders that handle all four.
I didn't see mention of a fine in either the babel translation or in the english version. Can anybody comment on what gives LinuxTag the ability to fine SCO?
no, it means people in California must pay sales tax when purchasing from online retailers with a physical presence in California.
You answer your own question. Justifying the purchase would just be proving that it is the correct tool. I think justification should always be given for a purchase made with taxpayer money, whether it's for proprietary software, open source software, or a new soda machine.
I hadn't meant to imply it was a government tax. Personally, I'd rather not pay a markup on a CDR that won't be used for audio.
In the US, you can buy CDR Audio disks for like $10. The price markup vs a regular data CDR is the tax to offset the "lost revenue". RIAA still doesn't like p2p though, nor do they like manufacturers making equipment that can copy the CDs.
I do want the music, I just don't want the product the RIAA is pushing. By stealing the music, I would be arming the RIAA to go to Congress to push for stiffer legislation to protect their product. I buy used CDs, because afaik, the RIAA doesn't get royalties from it. I didn't say p2p networks are to blame, I said stealing music is the wrong response. I don't blame kazaa for lost record sales, I agree that it is a flawed argument, but it's one that Congress listens to. I'm not defending the RIAA's actions, I'm challenging the reactions that just feed the fire ("fuck RIAA, download your music for free"). I disagree that laws should be enforced differently for different people. Stealing is stealing. I agree that the lawsuits coming out the RIAA are rediculous.
By pirating music you're demonstrating that there is demand for it. Since it is currently illegal to pirate music, you're just arming the RIAA with data that says people want the music but would rather steal it. This is why they start treating customers like criminals instead of customers. You're giving them data to present to congress to push for more redundant laws which do nothing but erode our rights as consumers. When you get slapped with a 7+ digit fine from the RIAA for stealing, don't come crying to people who actually care about ethically stnading up for their rights. To get the RIAA to change their ways, we need to show them there's no demand for their product (there's more to the product then the content alone), and that means don't buy it, and don't steal it.
The ability to put a CD in your stereo and enjoy the content should not be compared to the ability to eat. They're on totally different levels, one is a luxury (albeit an easily obtainable one), the other is a basic human right. I don't have to buy new CDs to listen to good new music. I can buy them used, go to concerts, and make my own.
Uh, isn't SCO claiming patent infringement by IBM? And now that SuSe and RedHat are selling distributions which uses that code from IBM which infringes on their patents, SCO is going after them too, for patent infringement?
That's nonsense. You can implement the same feature a different way (different algorithm perhaps) then what is patented. Otherwise the patent would be too broad and should be stricken.
Because once the 'infringed' code/features is identified, anybody can reimplement and sell in a commercial capacity, as I state later in my post.
What on earth do they hope to accomplish? Getting rid of Linux vendors? That's futile, since the source is already available on the net for free. Chunks of cash from Linux vendors? That would be stupid too. If they are awarded a settlement, it would likely result in bankrupting the targeted vendors. But that wouldn't remove them from the marketplace, since the distributions are, once again, already available on the net for free. Do they think that former customers will suddenly come to them? That's arrogant. The hackers would find out through the course of the trials what parts of the Linux kernel, if any, violate patents, and re-implement such that it's no longer in violation. The only thing SCO can hope to do is temporarily dispose of popular Linux vendors and piss off the very demographic that might ever be interested in their product.
I guess PHB's can start using them now that they can pile up documents in large random .. uh .. piles, all over their desktops, just like their desks and shelves.
it was a joke, the article point out that "There is no other UNIX system which adds the same kind of protection" too many times for my liking.
hint - read the article before responding/modding