Error- that does not compute. You think that waiting for an answer from a slashdotter who might never respond is somehow faster than clicking "I'm feeling lucky" on Google?
Anyone reading a videogame forum should either recognize the abbreviations for the top 20 PC games, or be prepared to go look them up.
Perhaps it's you who missed the fact that the parent seems to think this replaces and Exchange server at home.
Or prehaps you completely misread the post. (Given your continued grammatical errors, this appears more and more likely.)
It didn't say exchange is needed at home; it said it's not needed. And it went on explain that because it's not needed, the fact that Linux can't connect to Exchange means it's even more likely to suceed at home than at work.
A "contract of service" is a different thing than a "contract for work". In the former, the contractor just works for the employer for a period of time on whatever she's told to do. In the latter, the specific software to be created is described in the contract. It's that case that most people call "contracting"... and that's where the author also retains copyright, unless specifically transfered.
Duh. That was supposed to be idiotic- equally as idiotic as the Tocqueville report. Maybe he was a little too subtle...
The poster was pointing out that just because something costs jobs or destroys company value doesn't mean it's bad. To fear that a technology will take away your salary is called "Ludditism". If successful cold fusion will destroy the worth of oil companies, so what?
Everything should be like the way Linux and the Amish do it - as backbreaking and labor intensive as possible, because that means more work!
That's a mischaracterization of Linux. In some cases it can be more work, in others less- because once somebody does the work, everyone else can often copy it free of charge.
Both the freeness of Linux and the handholding of Microsoft can in some situations destroy jobs- but in neither case is that a bad thing.
Secondly, a basic government is needed to protect property rights (that's a tenent of Libertariansim)
Conflating Libertarianism and libertarianism makes you look as stupid as if you mixed up Republicans and republicans or Democrats and democrats.
In all cases, the specific uppercased political party named itself after a lowercased general principle, but has gone on to define itself in ways far beyond or even in opposition to what the original term meant.
The acid test to distinguish a Libertarian from a libertarian is to ask "Should a man be able to sell himself into slavery?" The Libertarian says yes, a libertarian says no.
Carmack has been seemingly a little disappointed with linux sales and such. So i found it interestin that they are gonna jam with a linux client anyway.
Well duh. He released Quake3 with a separate Linux-only box! That's just plain idiocy... ok, call it "over-optimism" if you want to be nice. Anyone should've been able to tell that'd be a huge waste of money.
Actually writing the Linux client was rather cheap for such hotshot programmers (since they needed to make a Linux server and a non-DirectX Mac version anyhow).
But actually pressing separate runs of CDs and shipping multiple boxes to stores (paying for all shelfspace) was obviously just burning money. (Eventually, the stores that were stuck with pallets of unsold Linux versions slapped stickers on them giving the URL for the Windows EXE and sold them at $1/each).
It was surprising that Carmack didn't predict that would happen, but he's learned his lesson now.
That's a lie. Ada was rich, and to keep her paying for Babbage's project, he had to make her feel like she was accomplishing something. He figured out the Bernoulli program himself, explained it to her, and let her write it out.
Then in the 20th century, that lie was reinvigorated by educators wanting to supply girls with technical role-models.
BitTorrent is the often the only way to get Slackware ISOs nowadays...
Bittorrent is not "most P2P apps". Bittorrent only handles downloading, not searching... while stuff like WinMX, Kazaa, and Gnutella actually spend most of their effort on searching for files.
If you run Gnutella to get a Linux ISO, your PC will transfer search results looking for copyright infringing files. But with BT, you share only exactly what you're downloading, nothing else.
(However, people who operate sites like torrentz.com are clearly abetting copyright infringement...)
However: it was entirely possible to RUN windows 3.1 on almost any alternative DOS. In fact, many of these DOS's ran it faster.
Wrong wrong wrong! Microsoft added specific code for Windows to detect if it was running on DR-DOS and abort with a confusing error message if so. It was intentional incompatibility for no reason but to hurt a competitor.
In brief: the internet is artificial, not natural. What man created, man can control- or destroy if it refuses control. With sufficient motivation, the government can and will crack down on undesirable internet traffic. The reason the net has appeared immune to censorship so far is that the authorities' motivation to control it was low.
I won't comment on the rest of your post, because that quote was actually irrelevant to it...
Hmmm, commit an act of Cyber Terrorism like release a worm into the wild, and just because you do not live in the middle-east, you are automatically not a terrorist?
Wrong! You're not a terrorist because releasing a worm isn't terrorism.
Until the public starts to be actually terrified by computer worms, it's not terrorism. I thought that was obvious...
In the USA we have our own terrorists, perhaps you forgot about Oklahoma City?
Yes, and that was terrorism because, like many other terrorist actions, it featured sudden explosive death. No Windows Worm yet known can cause flaming bodyparts to rain from the sky.
I was under the impression you couldn't patent things like this.
I guess you're new to Slashdot, because we've been complaining about the whole idea of software patents for years.
The fact is, you can't write any nontrivial computer program without infringing on multiple patents.
You point out that these "inventions" seem obvious. That's certainly true today, and maybe was true back when the patents were filed (some are 10+ years old). But looking at the validity of patents from the highest level, there's actually a factor much more important than obviousness: "Would the 'inventor' have created and then not hidden this thing if she didn't anticipate patent protection?"
If the answer is yes, then by the US Constitution, patents shouldn't apply. (Constitution states that Intellectual Property is allowed only to "promote progress of science and useful arts").
That's why medicines should be patentable (because few people will go through the enormous investment to test a drug if generics can copy it immediately) but most software and business practices (like Amazon's "One Click") shouldn't be (because Amazon would've invented and implemented that system regardless of having patent protection)
Insane logic would be to coat the switch with peanut butter then hold out a ferral squirrel with tongs so the rabid rodent flips the switch
Feral, not ferral. And there's no such thing as a "feral squirrel", since "feral" means "no longer domesticated".
It's a squirrel? All along I thought I had a mongoose in my inventory! How can I get by the snake room with just a squirrel?
One of the more famous examples of adventure-game puzzles based on a combination of sticky food and fuzzy animals was Gabriel Knight 3. To visit a different town, you had to steal someone's driver's license, draw a mustache on it, pour maple syrup on your face, kiss a cat (to give yourself a mustache too), and then grab his motor scooter.
The other save type was the "Interrupt" save that could be used pretty much anywhere and was accessed via the inventory screen.
Anywhere? How about on day 13/40 of nocturnally sneaking into the warehouse, eh? That was a brilliant gameplay sequence!
After you tried to sneak in once, you were locked into attempting it again and again every 24 hours, skipping the time in between. If you can't sneak well, there's no escaping the loop: CUTSCENE, sneak around 4 crates, get caught, CUTSCENE, REPEAT... although after a few months of this, a bum takes pity and carries you through.
(Once finally inside, the man who lives there gives an enthusiastic greeting, and suggests you telephone next time before dropping by!)
You only *think* Saddam didn't support Al Queda, there's no proof either way and it's the kind of thing he'd do.
Al Queda supported Islamist theocracies, such as the Taleban government of Afganistan. Saddam was too far away from Afganistan to interact with them, so we must instead look at his behavior towards Islamic fundamentalist states that border on Iraq. Such as Kuwait, Iran, and Saudi Arabia.
Hmm... what did he do to them??
(Or a more simplified version: Al Quaeda called non-bearded men sinners)
Slashdot Mirror
She was just a lowly coder...
You could call her, at most, a "technical writer".
Error- that does not compute. You think that waiting for an answer from a slashdotter who might never respond is somehow faster than clicking "I'm feeling lucky" on Google?
Anyone reading a videogame forum should either recognize the abbreviations for the top 20 PC games, or be prepared to go look them up.
Perhaps it's you who missed the fact that the parent seems to think this replaces and Exchange server at home.
Or prehaps you completely misread the post. (Given your continued grammatical errors, this appears more and more likely.)
It didn't say exchange is needed at home; it said it's not needed. And it went on explain that because it's not needed, the fact that Linux can't connect to Exchange means it's even more likely to suceed at home than at work.
This kind of over-generalization and mud slinging doesn't help anyone.
Microsoft is one specific legal entity. By definition, an attack against it is not a "generalization".
there's no such distinction in the copyright act.
Yes there is, and you just quoted it:
under a contract of service or apprenticeship
A "contract of service" is a different thing than a "contract for work". In the former, the contractor just works for the employer for a period of time on whatever she's told to do. In the latter, the specific software to be created is described in the contract. It's that case that most people call "contracting"... and that's where the author also retains copyright, unless specifically transfered.
What idiocy.
Duh. That was supposed to be idiotic- equally as idiotic as the Tocqueville report. Maybe he was a little too subtle...
The poster was pointing out that just because something costs jobs or destroys company value doesn't mean it's bad. To fear that a technology will take away your salary is called "Ludditism". If successful cold fusion will destroy the worth of oil companies, so what?
Everything should be like the way Linux and the Amish do it - as backbreaking and labor intensive as possible, because that means more work!
That's a mischaracterization of Linux. In some cases it can be more work, in others less- because once somebody does the work, everyone else can often copy it free of charge.
Both the freeness of Linux and the handholding of Microsoft can in some situations destroy jobs- but in neither case is that a bad thing.
Secondly, a basic government is needed to protect property rights (that's a tenent of Libertariansim)
Conflating Libertarianism and libertarianism makes you look as stupid as if you mixed up Republicans and republicans or Democrats and democrats.
In all cases, the specific uppercased political party named itself after a lowercased general principle, but has gone on to define itself in ways far beyond or even in opposition to what the original term meant.
The acid test to distinguish a Libertarian from a libertarian is to ask "Should a man be able to sell himself into slavery?" The Libertarian says yes, a libertarian says no.
You're trying to say that stop/start driving is still more efficient than driving at a constant rate?
He never wrote anything like that. Go up and read it again.
Sure, a hybrid can make stop/start driving more efficient than in other cars,
That's all he said... so I guess you had no point.
The EPA disagrees with your logic.
No. The numbers you just quoted fully suggest the EPA agrees.
Those mileage figures are approximately the same for city and highway driving- whereas for any other vehicle, city is much much worse (typically 20%).
Therefore, they agree that hybrid engines primarily help in city driving.
Wow. You have an exchange server at home AND consider yourself a typical home user?
What part of NO NEED don't you understand?
Carmack has been seemingly a little disappointed with linux sales and such. So i found it interestin that they are gonna jam with a linux client anyway.
Well duh. He released Quake3 with a separate Linux-only box! That's just plain idiocy... ok, call it "over-optimism" if you want to be nice. Anyone should've been able to tell that'd be a huge waste of money.
Actually writing the Linux client was rather cheap for such hotshot programmers (since they needed to make a Linux server and a non-DirectX Mac version anyhow).
But actually pressing separate runs of CDs and shipping multiple boxes to stores (paying for all shelfspace) was obviously just burning money. (Eventually, the stores that were stuck with pallets of unsold Linux versions slapped stickers on them giving the URL for the Windows EXE and sold them at $1/each).
It was surprising that Carmack didn't predict that would happen, but he's learned his lesson now.
Wow, you mean just like the FIRST DOOM?
Not at all! Half-Life's secret base is underground, but DOOM's secret base was in outer space. Totally, completely different things.
# PNG is a much more flexible format,
If PNG was more flexible, then I could convert all my animated GIF slideshows without data loss.
But I can't, so it's not.
Ada is credited with being the first programmer
That's a lie. Ada was rich, and to keep her paying for Babbage's project, he had to make her feel like she was accomplishing something. He figured out the Bernoulli program himself, explained it to her, and let her write it out.
Then in the 20th century, that lie was reinvigorated by educators wanting to supply girls with technical role-models.
BitTorrent is the often the only way to get Slackware ISOs nowadays...
Bittorrent is not "most P2P apps". Bittorrent only handles downloading, not searching... while stuff like WinMX, Kazaa, and Gnutella actually spend most of their effort on searching for files.
If you run Gnutella to get a Linux ISO, your PC will transfer search results looking for copyright infringing files. But with BT, you share only exactly what you're downloading, nothing else.
(However, people who operate sites like torrentz.com are clearly abetting copyright infringement...)
unless you live on Venus or Mercury, temperatures never come close to boiling.
You might not have heard about this exciting new invention they came up with recently (just 70,000 years ago): fire.
However: it was entirely possible to RUN windows 3.1 on almost any alternative DOS. In fact, many of these DOS's ran it faster.
Wrong wrong wrong! Microsoft added specific code for Windows to detect if it was running on DR-DOS and abort with a confusing error message if so. It was intentional incompatibility for no reason but to hurt a competitor.
I think this quote reveals alot. It is one of the inescapable facts about the Internet.
No, that quote is false. It is only an observation of past performance, not a guarantee of future safety.
In his book Code and Other Laws of Cyberspace, Prof Lessig demolishes that aphorism quite thoroughly.
In brief: the internet is artificial, not natural. What man created, man can control- or destroy if it refuses control. With sufficient motivation, the government can and will crack down on undesirable internet traffic. The reason the net has appeared immune to censorship so far is that the authorities' motivation to control it was low.
I won't comment on the rest of your post, because that quote was actually irrelevant to it...
Hmmm, commit an act of Cyber Terrorism like release a worm into the wild, and just because you do not live in the middle-east, you are automatically not a terrorist?
Wrong! You're not a terrorist because releasing a worm isn't terrorism.
Until the public starts to be actually terrified by computer worms, it's not terrorism. I thought that was obvious...
In the USA we have our own terrorists, perhaps you forgot about Oklahoma City?
Yes, and that was terrorism because, like many other terrorist actions, it featured sudden explosive death. No Windows Worm yet known can cause flaming bodyparts to rain from the sky.
I was under the impression you couldn't patent things like this.
I guess you're new to Slashdot, because we've been complaining about the whole idea of software patents for years.
The fact is, you can't write any nontrivial computer program without infringing on multiple patents.
You point out that these "inventions" seem obvious. That's certainly true today, and maybe was true back when the patents were filed (some are 10+ years old). But looking at the validity of patents from the highest level, there's actually a factor much more important than obviousness: "Would the 'inventor' have created and then not hidden this thing if she didn't anticipate patent protection?"
If the answer is yes, then by the US Constitution, patents shouldn't apply. (Constitution states that Intellectual Property is allowed only to "promote progress of science and useful arts").
That's why medicines should be patentable (because few people will go through the enormous investment to test a drug if generics can copy it immediately) but most software and business practices (like Amazon's "One Click") shouldn't be (because Amazon would've invented and implemented that system regardless of having patent protection)
Consider oil, pharmaceuticals, electricity. They're the companies holding the leash around Bush's neck.
Nope. Those aren't even companies, they're industries. None of those industries has one dominant company whose needs override all the others.
But in the software sector, only Microsoft has substantial political clout.
What the heck is MOHAA?
Ask your guardian or caretaker to sign you up for a remedial adult-ed course on "Googling". You'll be amazed at how easy the "World Wide Web" can be!
The other save type was the "Interrupt" save that could be used pretty much anywhere and was accessed via the inventory screen.
Anywhere? How about on day 13/40 of nocturnally sneaking into the warehouse, eh? That was a brilliant gameplay sequence!
After you tried to sneak in once, you were locked into attempting it again and again every 24 hours, skipping the time in between. If you can't sneak well, there's no escaping the loop: CUTSCENE, sneak around 4 crates, get caught, CUTSCENE, REPEAT... although after a few months of this, a bum takes pity and carries you through.
(Once finally inside, the man who lives there gives an enthusiastic greeting, and suggests you telephone next time before dropping by!)
You only *think* Saddam didn't support Al Queda, there's no proof either way and it's the kind of thing he'd do.
Al Queda supported Islamist theocracies, such as the Taleban government of Afganistan. Saddam was too far away from Afganistan to interact with them, so we must instead look at his behavior towards Islamic fundamentalist states that border on Iraq. Such as Kuwait, Iran, and Saudi Arabia.
Hmm... what did he do to them??
(Or a more simplified version: Al Quaeda called non-bearded men sinners)