Better make sure your contract doesn't say anything about the company owning inventions that you come up with while you're employed by them. Bottom line, talk to a lawyer, not Slashdot.
This is a potential solution for people who are concerned about privacy and liability. Sure, it would be nice if the world worked in a sane way, but the potential for someone to get the book thrown at them for doing something that wasn't a really big deal is still there.
Or consider the possibility (mentioned elsewhere on this thread) that someone got malware on their system that leaked their entire watermarked collection to the net? They've done nothing wrong, of course, but the watermark doesn't capture what actually happened, it just says these songs are owned by person X and they're now being freely distributed over the net. Even if it's shown that malware was involved in the leak, could you then be sued for negligence? I agree that carefully crafted laws could mitigate the problem, but it'd take lawmakers with a clue to do it.
In either case, if someone wants to avoid that particular hassle, circumventing the watermark in this way might be desirable to them. It's recognizing imperfections and potential flaws in the system, not complaining, IMHO.
I do think it's a step in the right direction, but I don't think that means that the consequences of that step shouldn't be weighed by everyone involved, consumer, industry and government alike.
Normally, even ocean ridges are covered by a thin layer of crust. What does come up is usually magma, which is not mantle material.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oceanic_ridge
So... Even if we do get enough advances medically to do this, tell me why on earth would we/want/ to revive someone so selfish and materialistic as to want to do this?
Sorry, couldn't help myself.
Got extra IDs you can't use right away? I'd be willing to bet that there are people that would pay for some handy identities... Sure, you'd have to trust the seller to an extent, but I'm sure there's a market for it.
Try to mimic the behavior of valign="bottom" on a td tag using CSS with a container of variable height. To the best of my knowledge, it can't be done without tables (or by cheating and applying a display: table-cell style rule to the container, which is not supported by IE) or using a Javascript hack. Complex grid-like layouts, where your content doesn't fit into a nice 3 column layout with a header and footer--basically anything where you've got to have things align with each other vertically--require tables to work. Tables will also 'give' when the content would normally overflow a fixed-width div. Granted, most sites don't need it, but that doesn't mean that tables for layout can't be an acceptable solution under some situations. See also http://www.mezzoblue.com/archives/2004/05/15/table s_oh_th/index.php
For the record, I advocate using CSS over Layout Tables whenever possible, but I'm not dogmatic about it either.
I'd say it depends on what you're trying to accomplish. There are still things that you can do with tables that you can't quite do with CSS, though the number of these are dwindling. IMHO, if you have to use a table for layout, it should be the most minimal table you can use, with the rest of the presentation loaded from CSS.
Handwaving about CSS as a panacea doesn't solve anyone's problems.
Hmm... Interesting... While I don't think that giving the money directly to Microsoft would fly (Microsoft is for-profit after all), perhaps a donation to the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation would work. I'd say the net effect would be nearly the same.
The problems at Hanford are mainly due to one of two things: age (some of the reactors and processing plants date back to WWII, when the effects of radioactivity was still not well understood) and purpose (Hanford was designed to extract Plutonium (Pu); only one of its reactors ever produced electrical power, and that was a secondary purpose)
First off, age. Hanford was built in WWII with exceedingly great haste, and disposal of wastes was put on the back-burner as something that can wait until after the war. Then the cold-war began, and while procedures improved somewhat, proper disposal was still a secondary concern. With the reactors themselves, all except one of the reactors there are "single-pass" reactors, meaning that instead of recycling its coolant, it just pumped it in from the Columbia River, sent it through the reactor, then (after letting it cool for a little bit) sent it back to the river.
The other problem is the Plutonium processing. This generated a lot of highly radioactive and toxic chemical wastes, which were (depending on how radioactive it was) stored in leak-prone tanks (although they have since moved most of the waste to better double-shelled tanks) or dumped directly to the ground.
So, to answer your question, I would presume that a modern nuclear power plant would be much less of a problem to deal with, since it would be built to use recycled coolant. There is still the problem of the spent feul rods, however (and here I'm not so sure, because I didn't study about modern practices so much) if handled properly from the outset, they could be stored safely enough to avoid environmental contamination. Perhaps someone with knowledge on modern nuclear power plants could better answer that part, though.
If you don't use one computer all the time and you want to check your feeds from other places, I'd recommend going with a web-based news-agreggation service. I personally use BlogLines, but there are other services out there as well.
RSS is implemented with XML and is generally transported via HTTP (although you could probably transport it over just about anything), like a web page. What does the TCP stack have to do with it?
IE 5.x doesn't do doctype switching: it is always in "quirks mode". IE 6 will switch to standards-compliance mode with the proper doctype, as long as the doctype is the absolute first thing in the (X)HTML document (i.e. no comments or xml prolog), and the doctype is well-formed. Some more info on doctype switching can be found here.
Re:Perfect application
on
OpenGL in PHP
·
· Score: 2, Informative
You'll probably want to keep looking. As others have mentioned, this only calls Win32 OpenGL API (using some bundled DLLs?), and requires that PHP be run from the command line. While the code may be more portable for being written in PHP (although, as I said, it relies on external libraries written for Win32), it won't run in your browser.
However, you might take a look at Shockwave Flash Remoting with PHP. That will run in your browser.
I'd assume that the idea is that this would be (like you said) to use it as a commuter car, with the idea that you would also own a larger "family" car as well, but use that one less. I personally think that it's a pretty good idea -- carpools and mass transit don't seem very popular, despite efforts to promote them. Might as well eliminate all the extra (unneeded) space if you're the only one commuting somewhere.
Maybe the family that is suing should give more credit to the 9-year old nephew that came up with the name in the first place if they want to be taken seriously... Honestly, talk about hypocrisy.
You're looking at it from the wrong end; the consumer end. Look at it from Sun's end and you may see it a bit differently. Since there is a comparable "commodity" system on the market, Sun would need to drop the price they charge to compete with the commodity system (without changing thier product strategy). Using your prices that would equate to a loss of profits: $34,000 - $20,000 = $14,000
That's $14,000 that they would lose in profits if they were to compete by matching the price of the commodity system. Depending on the actual costs of making that system, this sort of sacrifice in profits may be very unreasonable for them.
The "commodity" bit merely means that there's a fair number of players in this market for a product competing mostly based on price. It does not necessarily mean that you're going to get your high preformance computer for the same price as your desktop PC.
I'd agree with the translation argument if it were a matter of language. This, however, is a matter of disability. There is no way a deaf person and a hearing person can communicate over the telephone (via voice) unless 1 of 2 conditions are met:
Someone relays the TTY messages from the deaf person to the hearing person and vice versa
EVERYONE is required to have a TTY on the off chance that they need to communicate to a deaf person over the phone.
As you can see, they chose the more logical of the two. And to the rest of you on this thread saying "What would a deaf person need a telephone for anyway?", consider that not everyone has internet, SMS (via cellphone), or what have you, but the telephone is nearly ubiquitous, whether you hear or not. Should the deaf (and those that need to communicate with them) be unable to contact someone by phone, if that is the only way to contact them quickly? And how about 911 service?
Until you can answer that, I think people should think twice before suggesting forcing the deaf to use an alternate mode of communication than we do or registration (which is completely unequal--do we have to register with someone, besides the phone company, which 'registers' both hearing and deaf equally, just to use the telephone?). There was a reason that the ADA was signed into law.
Slashdot Mirror
Better make sure your contract doesn't say anything about the company owning inventions that you come up with while you're employed by them. Bottom line, talk to a lawyer, not Slashdot.
This is a potential solution for people who are concerned about privacy and liability. Sure, it would be nice if the world worked in a sane way, but the potential for someone to get the book thrown at them for doing something that wasn't a really big deal is still there.
Or consider the possibility (mentioned elsewhere on this thread) that someone got malware on their system that leaked their entire watermarked collection to the net? They've done nothing wrong, of course, but the watermark doesn't capture what actually happened, it just says these songs are owned by person X and they're now being freely distributed over the net. Even if it's shown that malware was involved in the leak, could you then be sued for negligence? I agree that carefully crafted laws could mitigate the problem, but it'd take lawmakers with a clue to do it.
In either case, if someone wants to avoid that particular hassle, circumventing the watermark in this way might be desirable to them. It's recognizing imperfections and potential flaws in the system, not complaining, IMHO.
I do think it's a step in the right direction, but I don't think that means that the consequences of that step shouldn't be weighed by everyone involved, consumer, industry and government alike.
The Bad Astronomy blog has a clearer explanation of what this means (read: not much) over here: http://www.badastronomy.com/bablog/2007/08/03/new- planet-with-earthlike-orbit-nah/
Try the links here: http://www.google.com/search?ie=UTF-8&oe=utf-8&q=d ual+monitor+productivity+study
You'll even get a Slashdot article linking to a study done on it:
http://developers.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=03/1 0/09/137232&mode=flat&tid=137&tid=196
See, that wasn't hard...
Normally, even ocean ridges are covered by a thin layer of crust. What does come up is usually magma, which is not mantle material. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oceanic_ridge
I'm pretty sure that's how life insurance is supposed to work. Sorry.
So... Even if we do get enough advances medically to do this, tell me why on earth would we /want/ to revive someone so selfish and materialistic as to want to do this?
Sorry, couldn't help myself.
Got extra IDs you can't use right away? I'd be willing to bet that there are people that would pay for some handy identities... Sure, you'd have to trust the seller to an extent, but I'm sure there's a market for it.
Try to mimic the behavior of valign="bottom" on a td tag using CSS with a container of variable height. To the best of my knowledge, it can't be done without tables (or by cheating and applying a display: table-cell style rule to the container, which is not supported by IE) or using a Javascript hack. Complex grid-like layouts, where your content doesn't fit into a nice 3 column layout with a header and footer--basically anything where you've got to have things align with each other vertically--require tables to work. Tables will also 'give' when the content would normally overflow a fixed-width div. Granted, most sites don't need it, but that doesn't mean that tables for layout can't be an acceptable solution under some situations. See also http://www.mezzoblue.com/archives/2004/05/15/table s_oh_th/index.php
For the record, I advocate using CSS over Layout Tables whenever possible, but I'm not dogmatic about it either.
I'd say it depends on what you're trying to accomplish. There are still things that you can do with tables that you can't quite do with CSS, though the number of these are dwindling. IMHO, if you have to use a table for layout, it should be the most minimal table you can use, with the rest of the presentation loaded from CSS. Handwaving about CSS as a panacea doesn't solve anyone's problems.
Hmm... Interesting... While I don't think that giving the money directly to Microsoft would fly (Microsoft is for-profit after all), perhaps a donation to the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation would work. I'd say the net effect would be nearly the same.
I did a short research paper on Hanford, so I think I might be able to answer this a bit.
The problems at Hanford are mainly due to one of two things: age (some of the reactors and processing plants date back to WWII, when the effects of radioactivity was still not well understood) and purpose (Hanford was designed to extract Plutonium (Pu); only one of its reactors ever produced electrical power, and that was a secondary purpose)
First off, age. Hanford was built in WWII with exceedingly great haste, and disposal of wastes was put on the back-burner as something that can wait until after the war. Then the cold-war began, and while procedures improved somewhat, proper disposal was still a secondary concern. With the reactors themselves, all except one of the reactors there are "single-pass" reactors, meaning that instead of recycling its coolant, it just pumped it in from the Columbia River, sent it through the reactor, then (after letting it cool for a little bit) sent it back to the river.
The other problem is the Plutonium processing. This generated a lot of highly radioactive and toxic chemical wastes, which were (depending on how radioactive it was) stored in leak-prone tanks (although they have since moved most of the waste to better double-shelled tanks) or dumped directly to the ground.
So, to answer your question, I would presume that a modern nuclear power plant would be much less of a problem to deal with, since it would be built to use recycled coolant. There is still the problem of the spent feul rods, however (and here I'm not so sure, because I didn't study about modern practices so much) if handled properly from the outset, they could be stored safely enough to avoid environmental contamination. Perhaps someone with knowledge on modern nuclear power plants could better answer that part, though.
If you don't use one computer all the time and you want to check your feeds from other places, I'd recommend going with a web-based news-agreggation service. I personally use BlogLines, but there are other services out there as well.
RSS is implemented with XML and is generally transported via HTTP (although you could probably transport it over just about anything), like a web page. What does the TCP stack have to do with it?
IE 5.x doesn't do doctype switching: it is always in "quirks mode". IE 6 will switch to standards-compliance mode with the proper doctype, as long as the doctype is the absolute first thing in the (X)HTML document (i.e. no comments or xml prolog), and the doctype is well-formed. Some more info on doctype switching can be found here.
Sweat comes to mind...
You'll probably want to keep looking. As others have mentioned, this only calls Win32 OpenGL API (using some bundled DLLs?), and requires that PHP be run from the command line. While the code may be more portable for being written in PHP (although, as I said, it relies on external libraries written for Win32), it won't run in your browser.
However, you might take a look at Shockwave Flash Remoting with PHP. That will run in your browser.
I'd assume that the idea is that this would be (like you said) to use it as a commuter car, with the idea that you would also own a larger "family" car as well, but use that one less. I personally think that it's a pretty good idea -- carpools and mass transit don't seem very popular, despite efforts to promote them. Might as well eliminate all the extra (unneeded) space if you're the only one commuting somewhere.
Maybe the family that is suing should give more credit to the 9-year old nephew that came up with the name in the first place if they want to be taken seriously... Honestly, talk about hypocrisy.
Sorry, but FileZilla runs as a native Win32 app. It doesn't have anything to do with Mozilla.
You're looking at it from the wrong end; the consumer end. Look at it from Sun's end and you may see it a bit differently. Since there is a comparable "commodity" system on the market, Sun would need to drop the price they charge to compete with the commodity system (without changing thier product strategy). Using your prices that would equate to a loss of profits:
$34,000 - $20,000 = $14,000
That's $14,000 that they would lose in profits if they were to compete by matching the price of the commodity system. Depending on the actual costs of making that system, this sort of sacrifice in profits may be very unreasonable for them.
The "commodity" bit merely means that there's a fair number of players in this market for a product competing mostly based on price. It does not necessarily mean that you're going to get your high preformance computer for the same price as your desktop PC.
I'd agree with the translation argument if it were a matter of language. This, however, is a matter of disability . There is no way a deaf person and a hearing person can communicate over the telephone (via voice) unless 1 of 2 conditions are met:
As you can see, they chose the more logical of the two. And to the rest of you on this thread saying "What would a deaf person need a telephone for anyway?", consider that not everyone has internet, SMS (via cellphone), or what have you, but the telephone is nearly ubiquitous, whether you hear or not. Should the deaf (and those that need to communicate with them) be unable to contact someone by phone, if that is the only way to contact them quickly? And how about 911 service?
Until you can answer that, I think people should think twice before suggesting forcing the deaf to use an alternate mode of communication than we do or registration (which is completely unequal--do we have to register with someone, besides the phone company, which 'registers' both hearing and deaf equally, just to use the telephone?). There was a reason that the ADA was signed into law.
That isn't the full source. I saw this before as it was making the rounds on web developer blogs-- the full source is much longer.
Unfortunately I didn't think to grab a copy before it got /.ed.
http://www.research.ibm.com/remail/
In my opinion, borrowing ideas like that for a groupware/email client would be what distinguishes Evolution from the competition.
Oh, and pretty please make a Winders version for those of us that are stuck here? :)
Appropriate, considering that the seagull is Utah's State Bird.