So, then, why didn't you write your own CMS in C instead of the badly-coded security nightmare that is PHP-Nuke?
It would seem to me that if you wanted the most efficient site, you would code all your web apps in C. For, as we all know, it IS the most efficient language out there, and should be used in any programming project.
Let's see what the patents are first. If they're patents for outdated, obsolete methods, then so what. If they're patents for useful stuff, then game on!
I get it. The driver behind the Mac Mini is Windows users of iPods and iTunes (like me). They've seen a glimpse of the other side, and want more, but not at the price of Apple's usual fare (like me). So, Apple trots out this baby step of a switch, and expects those people will find it more palatable before really stepping up and buying a "real" mac (and believe me, they're thisclose to snagging me).
So, in order to compete against the Mac Mini, Intel (or a PC maker like Dell or HP*) needs to come up with something so awesome, so cool, so easy, so let's-get-a-taste-of-PC, that people will buy this machine just because of that previous device. Business people call this a "loss leader", because while it's almost certain that Apple doesn't make a large profit off the Mini, it'll probably lead many people into stepping up into the major profit products.
Walmart is the #1 music store in the country. Like Vlasic (the pickle people) said in an article last year, "If you don't sell at Walmart, you're dead". Trust me, the music industry needs Walmart more than Walmart needs them. I think the figure is that music is only 2% of their sales.
Oh, so I see, I ask a perfectly legitimate question about why a story about a technology awards show is listed under games, under my own username, and I get modded as flamebait? Yeah, that's good moderating there.
Here in the US, pay is inversely proportional to real work.
Well, duh. It's not THAT sad. Pay is also directly proportional to experience and education. Are you suggesting that the guy who's worked 25 years to make it into management deserves less than the guy who just got hired last week, just because he works harder?
I don't know about you, but the reason I went to college and took on $20,000 in debt was because I was sick of those jobs and I wanted to be able to earn more while not breakin my back every day. I've worked in jobs worse than McDonalds for less pay than McDonald's. It sucks. But, that's life. You get out what you put in.
Why is Too Short on that list? Sure, he was "the king of sex rhymes" or whatever, but he sucked. His only fame was pandering to horny teenagers. I mean, c'mon. One of his songs starts out with 45 seconds of "Bitch, you got a bomb-ass pussy" repeated over and over. Yeah, that's skill there.
I would say, to move this forward into the current state of hip-hop goodness, you'd have to include Nas, Jay-Z, and Mos Def.
BTW, 50 WAS a good rapper, but he's started putting out stuff just because it sells.
Not arguing with your main points, but I wanted to say that when the parent to your post says private funding, that doesn't necssarily mean self-funding.
I work at a university's medical school, which receives hundreds of millions of dollars of research grants and awards each year. I'd say about 50%-60% of that comes from federal funding - NIH, CDC, Department of Defense, and even some from the US Army. The rest comes from private donations - charitable trusts, Amer. Cancer Soc, etc.
We're talking millions upon millions of dollars coming from these private funds. So private funding is out there.
there is a ban on funding/embryonic/ stem cell research which has nothing to do with the original article
Not true. There's a restriction on funding to the lines that are already there. The federal government still pours millions, maybe even billions, of dollars every year into embryonic stem cell research through NIH grants, CDC grants, and even Department of Defense and US Army grants.
I heard a guy talking about Boing Boing putting ads in their RSS feed and said, you know what? It's not Boing Boing's fault. It's MY fault for subscribing. It's my fault for visiting their site. Basically, what you're saying.
In other words, they imply that he is what they are all about.
See, that's why Republicans just don't get it. They show it with retardulous statements like this. I don't know if you are one or not, but I hear a lot of this talk from them.
Having him in the Pres. box wasn't the party's decision, I believe it was Jimmy Carter. If Jimmy Carter wants someone with him in his box, more power to him, as wrong as that phrase sounds. It says nothing about Democrats. It says something about Jimmy Carter.
Painting Democrats with such a broad brush is exactly how Republicans operate. Oh, they're all Michael Moore. They're all leftist Commies.
I don't pick out Michelle Malkin and call all Republicans racists. I don't claim all Republicans believe we should put all Arabs in internment camps while we fight the WOT. I don't claim all Republicans are Strom Thurmond-type racist bigots. I don't say Republicans are all Jerry Falwell or Pat Robertson. I don't say these people being Republicans in high esteem says something about the Republicans, I say it says something about the people who follow these people.
I think we're talking about two different definitions of politics. I think you're talking about the art/science of government. That's a great and important topic.
I'm talking about the other definition, social relationships involving authority and power (according to my dictionary). I'm talking about people playing favorites and putting their own success above that of the group. You know, ass kissing, "I'm not gonna do this because I don't like him" kinda stuff. You see it a lot in American offices.
ha ha. You obviously know nothing about American history. Copyright law is in our Constitution.
Article I, Section 8, Clause 8 of the U.S. Constitution: "the Congress shall have power . . . to promote the progress of science and useful arts, by securing for limited times to authors and inventors the exclusive right to their respective writings and discoveries."
Ahh, but what if the song (as in this case) was part of a larger work of art (the album) then it's got a frame of creativity around it, no matter how Apple distributes it.
look, again, it's got nothing to do with if it's got "content". Phone listings have content, but they're not copyrightable because being sorted by alphabetical order requires no creativity.
The copyright law protects works that are "marginally creative". So you know what? databases usually aren't copyrightable.
White noise as-is isnt' copyrightable because there's nothing creative about it - not even marginally. Now if it was part of some other piece of art as a whole (part of a song)- then that's a different story.
The bottom line is, copyright law is quite subjective and will often depend heavily on which judge you appear before.
IANAL, but I've taken some technology law courses.
It has nothing to do with how many notes. It's whether it's marginally creative. In this case, I think it'd be up to a judge. A consumer would argue that silence is inherently not creative. A copyright holder would argue that it's not just the silence, it's the position of it on the album, the significance of the length, the "innovativeness" of silence as an expression of art, and so forth. Frankly, since the threshold for creativity is quite low (hell, you can copyright a directory of people just because you've ordered it in a certain way), I think Apple's got a pretty good case.
Obviously the people you associate with are stupid, and have a terrible friend that feels he has to sneak something past them to get them to like it. I'm glad I don't have you as a friend, you might try to sneak some crack in under my nose in the guise of sugar cubes.
Bottom line: It doesn't matter. Since it's owned by the Army (AFAIK), and it's not classified, it's public domain. Anything produced by the US government that's not classifed is public domain.
Slashdot Mirror
Microsoft: We don't care what's better - use Linux and we'll sue you.
Microsoft has never threatened anyone using Linux. In fact, many people at Microsoft also run Linux and have it connected to Microsoft's network.
There's also projects to get Windows to play with Linux more nicely, with better Samba integration and such.
See, it's people like you that this article's talking about. Quit spreading FUD and find the truth.
yes, for C-x C-s is the only true way to be saved!
So, then, why didn't you write your own CMS in C instead of the badly-coded security nightmare that is PHP-Nuke?
It would seem to me that if you wanted the most efficient site, you would code all your web apps in C. For, as we all know, it IS the most efficient language out there, and should be used in any programming project.
We're going through this in Indiana, as well. In fact, the bills look strikingly similar. Luckily, our bill died in committee.
This bill would even prohibit towns that the telcos won't serve (because it wouldn't be profitable enough) from building an infrastructure.
Let's see what the patents are first. If they're patents for outdated, obsolete methods, then so what. If they're patents for useful stuff, then game on!
I get it. The driver behind the Mac Mini is Windows users of iPods and iTunes (like me). They've seen a glimpse of the other side, and want more, but not at the price of Apple's usual fare (like me). So, Apple trots out this baby step of a switch, and expects those people will find it more palatable before really stepping up and buying a "real" mac (and believe me, they're thisclose to snagging me).
So, in order to compete against the Mac Mini, Intel (or a PC maker like Dell or HP*) needs to come up with something so awesome, so cool, so easy, so let's-get-a-taste-of-PC, that people will buy this machine just because of that previous device. Business people call this a "loss leader", because while it's almost certain that Apple doesn't make a large profit off the Mini, it'll probably lead many people into stepping up into the major profit products.
*probably HP, because Dell puts nothing into R&D.
Walmart is the #1 music store in the country. Like Vlasic (the pickle people) said in an article last year, "If you don't sell at Walmart, you're dead". Trust me, the music industry needs Walmart more than Walmart needs them. I think the figure is that music is only 2% of their sales.
Oh, so I see, I ask a perfectly legitimate question about why a story about a technology awards show is listed under games, under my own username, and I get modded as flamebait? Yeah, that's good moderating there.
Here in the US, pay is inversely proportional to real work.
Well, duh. It's not THAT sad. Pay is also directly proportional to experience and education. Are you suggesting that the guy who's worked 25 years to make it into management deserves less than the guy who just got hired last week, just because he works harder?
I don't know about you, but the reason I went to college and took on $20,000 in debt was because I was sick of those jobs and I wanted to be able to earn more while not breakin my back every day. I've worked in jobs worse than McDonalds for less pay than McDonald's. It sucks. But, that's life. You get out what you put in.
Why is Too Short on that list? Sure, he was "the king of sex rhymes" or whatever, but he sucked. His only fame was pandering to horny teenagers. I mean, c'mon. One of his songs starts out with 45 seconds of "Bitch, you got a bomb-ass pussy" repeated over and over. Yeah, that's skill there.
I would say, to move this forward into the current state of hip-hop goodness, you'd have to include Nas, Jay-Z, and Mos Def.
BTW, 50 WAS a good rapper, but he's started putting out stuff just because it sells.
no, it's unfortunate that it can be done without user interaction.
Why is this in Games?
Not arguing with your main points, but I wanted to say that when the parent to your post says private funding, that doesn't necssarily mean self-funding.
I work at a university's medical school, which receives hundreds of millions of dollars of research grants and awards each year. I'd say about 50%-60% of that comes from federal funding - NIH, CDC, Department of Defense, and even some from the US Army. The rest comes from private donations - charitable trusts, Amer. Cancer Soc, etc.
We're talking millions upon millions of dollars coming from these private funds. So private funding is out there.
there is a ban on funding /embryonic/ stem cell research which has nothing to do with the original article
Not true. There's a restriction on funding to the lines that are already there. The federal government still pours millions, maybe even billions, of dollars every year into embryonic stem cell research through NIH grants, CDC grants, and even Department of Defense and US Army grants.
I heard a guy talking about Boing Boing putting ads in their RSS feed and said, you know what? It's not Boing Boing's fault. It's MY fault for subscribing. It's my fault for visiting their site. Basically, what you're saying.
In other words, they imply that he is what they are all about.
See, that's why Republicans just don't get it. They show it with retardulous statements like this. I don't know if you are one or not, but I hear a lot of this talk from them.
Having him in the Pres. box wasn't the party's decision, I believe it was Jimmy Carter. If Jimmy Carter wants someone with him in his box, more power to him, as wrong as that phrase sounds. It says nothing about Democrats. It says something about Jimmy Carter.
Painting Democrats with such a broad brush is exactly how Republicans operate. Oh, they're all Michael Moore. They're all leftist Commies.
I don't pick out Michelle Malkin and call all Republicans racists. I don't claim all Republicans believe we should put all Arabs in internment camps while we fight the WOT. I don't claim all Republicans are Strom Thurmond-type racist bigots. I don't say Republicans are all Jerry Falwell or Pat Robertson. I don't say these people being Republicans in high esteem says something about the Republicans, I say it says something about the people who follow these people.
I think we're talking about two different definitions of politics. I think you're talking about the art/science of government. That's a great and important topic.
I'm talking about the other definition, social relationships involving authority and power (according to my dictionary). I'm talking about people playing favorites and putting their own success above that of the group. You know, ass kissing, "I'm not gonna do this because I don't like him" kinda stuff. You see it a lot in American offices.
ha ha. You obviously know nothing about American history. Copyright law is in our Constitution.
Article I, Section 8, Clause 8 of the U.S.
Constitution: "the Congress shall have power . . . to promote the progress of science and useful arts, by securing for limited times to authors and inventors the exclusive right to their respective writings and discoveries."
And. the Copyright Act was passed in 1790.
Here's a place for you to learn about all this stuff: http://arl.cni.org/info/frn/copy/timeline.html
Well, then, that would constitute marginally creative work. Case closed, this is copyright violation.
Ahh, but what if the song (as in this case) was part of a larger work of art (the album) then it's got a frame of creativity around it, no matter how Apple distributes it.
This kid is stupid and an attention-whore.
look, again, it's got nothing to do with if it's got "content". Phone listings have content, but they're not copyrightable because being sorted by alphabetical order requires no creativity.
The copyright law protects works that are "marginally creative". So you know what? databases usually aren't copyrightable.
White noise as-is isnt' copyrightable because there's nothing creative about it - not even marginally. Now if it was part of some other piece of art as a whole (part of a song)- then that's a different story.
The bottom line is, copyright law is quite subjective and will often depend heavily on which judge you appear before.
IANAL, but I've taken some technology law courses.
It has nothing to do with how many notes. It's whether it's marginally creative. In this case, I think it'd be up to a judge. A consumer would argue that silence is inherently not creative. A copyright holder would argue that it's not just the silence, it's the position of it on the album, the significance of the length, the "innovativeness" of silence as an expression of art, and so forth. Frankly, since the threshold for creativity is quite low (hell, you can copyright a directory of people just because you've ordered it in a certain way), I think Apple's got a pretty good case.
Obviously the people you associate with are stupid, and have a terrible friend that feels he has to sneak something past them to get them to like it. I'm glad I don't have you as a friend, you might try to sneak some crack in under my nose in the guise of sugar cubes.
You know what's funny? He was at the Republican National Convention, too. How dare they let him in.
Bottom line: It doesn't matter. Since it's owned by the Army (AFAIK), and it's not classified, it's public domain. Anything produced by the US government that's not classifed is public domain.