WP is getting there, but it and iOS suffer from being closed source (which hasn't stopped their popularity, though).
Reminds me of the joke about a mouse and an elephant walking in the desert, when the mouse looks back it says "We sure throw up a lot of dust, don't we?"
Oh please. You're watch too many indie "documentaries".
If all the shareholders in public companies were willing to sink the company for short term gains, companies wouldn't stay listed for more than a year. I think you'll find that generally isn't the case.
That's naive. And something went wrong with your short term memory (hint: banking crisis). Shareholder often keep their shares for only (fractions of) seconds - so what's preventing someone from buying lots of them, voting then selling off? Some shareholders even bet against themselves to limit their own risk...
Because that's what 99% of people who are mounting an ISO file need.
No, the 99% you're talking about uses a GUI to burn the ISO to a CD or USB stick.
The other 83% use it to build a new ISO image and do not like to select thousands of files by hand but prefer to use a single command for that. And that ISO file is not yet on a CD/DVD.
And the other 1.32% just thinks typing commands is cooler than using a GUI. They mount and play their music/film from the CLI.
For that kind of thing, you'd use additional parameters. His point was that the default should be to automatically do whatever is most reasonable for most users. If you know better, by all means, use your knowledge to specify the exact switches in advance.
The point is, use your Gnome/Unity/KDE/Xfce/... GUI to pop in a DVD and wait for it to ask what to do with it then click on "play DVD" and start watching. If you need anything that is not standard usage (watch, copy,...) then use the CLI. So the default options you propose are probably exactly the opposite of what most CLI users want...
Is there some way this kind of bullshit metric could be applied to lawyers? [...]
So if someone comes up with a meaningless way to judge the "output" of lawyers and makes their lives a living hell, it would be appropriate "justice". They would get to experience the kind of crap that they have been shoveling into the lives of normal humans.
[Number of word processor manual save]*Square root of[Number of vowels typed in last 24 hours]
It measures brain activity and penalizes copy/paste, template stuff like headers/footers, standard letters with a few fields changed per client...
That is not proof that the US is better than the USSR at innovation or producing military equipment. It is proof that the US was not invaded by the Germans.
.
For the record: I'm not saying Stalin or communism were a good things, I'm just trying to point out facts that are sometimes overshadowed by myths. The T-34 is in my opinion the best tank of WW II, the Sherman isn't even close.
Besides that, I still visit memorials and graveyards to pay my respects to US and Commonwealth soldiers that liberated Europe. Do you?
Victory in Afghanistan? Iraq? I think you define victory in a very narrow way, like the Risk game.
Afghanistan is going on. Still. After more than a decade. It is still feeding animosity against the west, the "war" for the hearts and minds is not won.
What you forget is that winning a battle is not the same as winning the war. Winning the war means achieving most of your political goals.
In the Battle of Kursk (July '43) the USSR had a lot of T-34 to put in the field against German Panzer III and IV and about 200 Panthers - which didn't perform well, lots of mechanical problems etc. The older III and IV's were inferior (armament, mobility, armour)
Perhaps it is cold war propaganda that made us believe those communists could not be competitive and must have been successful on numerical strength only. But that is a myth. T-34 were still used in '90s in the Balkan during the collapse of Yugoslavia.
European parliament is elected, the commission (government) isn't elected directly, it is appointed by the parliament. Still, we have a choice of more than two parties.
And yes, everybody is "forced" to use Facebook. Most people get tagged on photos sooner or later, even if they don't have an account. FB finds out information you might not be willing to release: birthday, phone numbers, where you live, who your friends are, what your password for your mail account is... if a friend releases that information about you, it doesn't even require an intervention, decision on your part.
I really doubt that they'll be able to do it but it would be interesting to be proven wrong.
It is possible, not too big a project at that. But it is pointless, BusyBox exists, they can use it, modify it so why reinventing the wheel? Probably the 'not invented here' syndrome...
[...] but does anyone here really believe that this belongs under "technology" and not Politics?
Really?
It's "morality" as a consequence of "technolgy", the newly acquired opportunity to kill opponents without too much "political" risk. No body bags or television footage of dead soldiers from downed Blackhawk (e.g. in Mogadishu). I think it is a very relevant story.
I smell a marketing campaign targeted against Google. Yahoo is powered by Bing. DuckduckGoo also powered by Bing.
I still prefer Google's track record on privacy over MS's or FB's. Not that I'm not worried about privacy, it is getting very difficult to escape the all seeing eyes...
Slashdot Mirror
If there is prior art the patent is invalid anyway, isn't it?
The submitted patent should be invalid. The copyright on the prior art might still be valid... Patent is not Copyright.
[...]The lawyer needs to purchase the information for the application and failed to do so.[...]
Then change the law so that even an IP-lawyer can understand it. This is just excessive greed.
Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.
I share your emotion, but actually, superfragilisticexpialadocious claims still only require ordinary, humble, simple evidence... One instance.
WP is getting there, but it and iOS suffer from being closed source (which hasn't stopped their popularity, though).
Reminds me of the joke about a mouse and an elephant walking in the desert, when the mouse looks back it says "We sure throw up a lot of dust, don't we?"
What would the point be to buy shares, vote and then sell them? Why would someone do that?
Vote for free. A vote against net neutrality for those who want it. Without any long term interest in the company.
Your understanding of financial markets is weak, to say the least.
The Dunning–Kruger effect begs to differ
Oh please. You're watch too many indie "documentaries".
If all the shareholders in public companies were willing to sink the company for short term gains, companies wouldn't stay listed for more than a year. I think you'll find that generally isn't the case.
That's naive. And something went wrong with your short term memory (hint: banking crisis). Shareholder often keep their shares for only (fractions of) seconds - so what's preventing someone from buying lots of them, voting then selling off? Some shareholders even bet against themselves to limit their own risk...
Because that's what 99% of people who are mounting an ISO file need.
No, the 99% you're talking about uses a GUI to burn the ISO to a CD or USB stick.
The other 83% use it to build a new ISO image and do not like to select thousands of files by hand but prefer to use a single command for that. And that ISO file is not yet on a CD/DVD.
And the other 1.32% just thinks typing commands is cooler than using a GUI. They mount and play their music/film from the CLI.
For that kind of thing, you'd use additional parameters. His point was that the default should be to automatically do whatever is most reasonable for most users. If you know better, by all means, use your knowledge to specify the exact switches in advance.
The point is, use your Gnome/Unity/KDE/Xfce/... GUI to pop in a DVD and wait for it to ask what to do with it then click on "play DVD" and start watching. If you need anything that is not standard usage (watch, copy,...) then use the CLI. So the default options you propose are probably exactly the opposite of what most CLI users want...
Sorry, I wasn't clear in my narrative.
Me: Did you read that article about Alan Parsons?
Average music listener: Alan who?
Me; Alan Parsons. He was the recording engineer for "Dark Side Of The Moon".
Average music listener: ???
Me: You know, Pink Floyd?
Average music listener: Ah Pink, but she's sooo 2005 - and who is Floyd?.
There, fixed that for you.
Is there some way this kind of bullshit metric could be applied to lawyers? [...]
So if someone comes up with a meaningless way to judge the "output" of lawyers and makes their lives a living hell, it would be appropriate "justice". They would get to experience the kind of crap that they have been shoveling into the lives of normal humans.
[Number of word processor manual save]*Square root of[Number of vowels typed in last 24 hours]
It measures brain activity and penalizes copy/paste, template stuff like headers/footers, standard letters with a few fields changed per client...
Slashdot lacks readers with experience on this topic.
That hasn't stopped anyone before.
That is not proof that the US is better than the USSR at innovation or producing military equipment. It is proof that the US was not invaded by the Germans.
.
For the record: I'm not saying Stalin or communism were a good things, I'm just trying to point out facts that are sometimes overshadowed by myths. The T-34 is in my opinion the best tank of WW II, the Sherman isn't even close.
Besides that, I still visit memorials and graveyards to pay my respects to US and Commonwealth soldiers that liberated Europe. Do you?
Victory in Afghanistan? Iraq? I think you define victory in a very narrow way, like the Risk game.
Afghanistan is going on. Still. After more than a decade. It is still feeding animosity against the west, the "war" for the hearts and minds is not won.
What you forget is that winning a battle is not the same as winning the war. Winning the war means achieving most of your political goals.
That's funny, and it is a good movie...
USA is not the only country in the world doing that - The French are more untrustworthy than Uncle Sam !
Are they? From an Indian perspective, the US is an ally of their arch enemy Pakistan...
They call it a World War. Not an American-German war. According to Wikipedia: Allied military deaths - 16 million, Axis military deaths: 8 million
In the Battle of Kursk (July '43) the USSR had a lot of T-34 to put in the field against German Panzer III and IV and about 200 Panthers - which didn't perform well, lots of mechanical problems etc. The older III and IV's were inferior (armament, mobility, armour)
Perhaps it is cold war propaganda that made us believe those communists could not be competitive and must have been successful on numerical strength only. But that is a myth. T-34 were still used in '90s in the Balkan during the collapse of Yugoslavia.
Then you have shitheads for friends if they're giving out your information without your permission...
See? Now you're releasing information about my friends
(allcaps)
But SOMEONE ELSE can give it away in your place!
Glad I got that of my chest, hehe.
[...]
Agreed - and that is indeed why I do not have a Facebook login.
And still, if you have enough friends with a FB login, lots of your private information is already in FB. They're very good at this.
European parliament is elected, the commission (government) isn't elected directly, it is appointed by the parliament. Still, we have a choice of more than two parties.
And yes, everybody is "forced" to use Facebook. Most people get tagged on photos sooner or later, even if they don't have an account. FB finds out information you might not be willing to release: birthday, phone numbers, where you live, who your friends are, what your password for your mail account is... if a friend releases that information about you, it doesn't even require an intervention, decision on your part.
I really doubt that they'll be able to do it but it would be interesting to be proven wrong.
It is possible, not too big a project at that. But it is pointless, BusyBox exists, they can use it, modify it so why reinventing the wheel? Probably the 'not invented here' syndrome...
In this new fangled hypertext thing, you can actually post that as links to TechDirt and The Register instead of making us type it in the address bar
But thanks for pointing is to some helpful information
Or live in the UK: Richard O'Dwyer
[...] but does anyone here really believe that this belongs under "technology" and not Politics? Really?
It's "morality" as a consequence of "technolgy", the newly acquired opportunity to kill opponents without too much "political" risk. No body bags or television footage of dead soldiers from downed Blackhawk (e.g. in Mogadishu). I think it is a very relevant story.
I smell a marketing campaign targeted against Google. Yahoo is powered by Bing. DuckduckGoo also powered by Bing.
I still prefer Google's track record on privacy over MS's or FB's. Not that I'm not worried about privacy, it is getting very difficult to escape the all seeing eyes...