Obviously you're poor and have never owned a new car.:-) An MOT isn't required until a vehicle is three years old.
A more likely option would be to imbed it in the tax disk. That would fit in well with SORN (Statutory Off-Road Notification: tells DVLA that the vehicle is not in use on public roads but hasn't been scrapped, so doesn't have to be taxed) and the recent announcement that the DVLA (people who administer road tax, amongst other things) will soon automatically send out fines to all registered keepers of un-taxed and un-SORNed vehicles.
The proposal doesn't say it's for additional monitoring: it's to replace the network used for the existing monitoring and other services. i.e. CCTV cameras on busy roads monitoring traffic flow; emergency telephones; variable traffic signs.
Whilst such a network could be used as part of a comprehensive traffic monitoring system that would require some sort of transponder in every vehicle, or a lot more cameras scanning (increasiongly false or obscured) licence plates.
As a habitual speeder, (only joking, officer) I wouldn't be keen on that sort of thing, but it hasn't come to that, yet. Of course the bastard Blunkett would love it - and not just for traffic offences.
Certainly, avoiding open war with Microsoft might be a reason. Another is probably the risk of failure. If everybody thinks they're about to Linuxize their entire business, it will look bad if they don't. With lower expectations they can take advantage of whatever successes they do acheive.
I used to get that every Saturday afternoon - good quality, free coffee at work, you see. I eventually found that a nice big mug of Espresso in the morning would see me through the whole day.:-)
My own experience when I was a humble programmer, a couple of decades ago, was that Computer Science graduates were a pain in the arse on the whole, because they had a lot of fancy ideas which didn't match the commercial reality. (We were writing stock control, order entry and similar software for a major manufacturer.)
Maybe things are better now, or are better in the USA, (I'm in the UK), but speaking as a university drop-out I think that CIS/CS/whatever degrees are over-rated. Decent vocational training like wot I did is much more suitable for people just churning out code from a spec.
I see a certain amount of this on the lists I follow - IBM, rather than Sun - but it's always been the way. Everybody has to start somewhere so there have always been dumb questions. Why, I may have asked one or two myself in the past!
Mailing lists and the like work as a co-operative support network only whilst those with more expertise are willing to help those with less. If you can't be bothered to help out a newbie, it takes little effort to ignore them.
Sometimes I ignore these posts myself - I'm paid to do my job, not theirs after all - but to offset that I try to make sure that my sig includes links to the FAQ, Archive and other vital resources. So even if I don't answer a query directly, I'm at least helping people to help themselves.
Things may be a bit worse now than in the past: some of these people are under a lot of pressure for quick results with few resources - that's why they were hired in the first place! So they tend to try a scattershot approach, asking the same question all over the place in the hope that someone will give them a quick answer. Also, because of the sudden interest in this type of outsourcing there are a lot more new administrators about all of a sudden. But even so, it seems to me that it's rather petty to refuse them assistance whilst they're trying valiantly to get up to speed.
I remember seeing something like that a few years ago. Some adverts are made with the expectation of being fast-forwarded through and take care that the brand name is clearly visible even at 10x.
It's possible that things are slightly different between the USA and here in the UK. For a start, we have off-track betting all over the place.
Very occasionally, you'll find a bookmaker who gets it wrong and there is a set of bets that guarantee a positive outcome. That's extremely rare now as a fairly straightforward bit of software can prevent that sort of mistake.
I'm not really au fait with spread betting, but with other types of gambling the key is to remember that the book is NOT based on the liklihood of a given outcome, but the cost to the bookie of each outcome. If you know more than the other punters, you can win.
Of course, with some types of gambling - e.g. roulette, SCOX shares - the important piece of knowledge is not to bet at all.
If the current SCO didn't know about that, they might have a case against the people they bought the IP rights off for selling something that was not what it purported to be.
I'd expect SuSE will be available all across IBM's product line.
It already is, although it has to be the Enterprise version in some cases, which costs money. Originally, IBM were supporting RedHat across the full hardware range, but it seems they've shifted the focus to SuSE.
They're also doing a lot of work on clustering, which has explicit support for Linux on their xSeries (Intel/AMD) boxes.
Isn't it important that the copyright owners are seen to be defending their IP? Otherwise, SCO could just turn around and say "Sure: Fred owns that bit of code but he doesn't really care about it, so the copyright's lapsed and we can do what the hell we like."
That might not be the case, and of course it's the sort of thing that could vary from one jurisdiction to another.
The Internet Dr Who has been common knowledge for ages and is not related to the new TV series, although it does give Richard E Grant a head start for the role of the new Doctor.
My understanding (IANAL, and I'm not an English lawyer at that) is that in copyright infringement cases, the plaintif should first be seeking rectification. i.e. To stop the infringement from taking place. In order to do so, SCO need to identify the infringement.
The fact that they have not done so is surely an indication that they do not want the infringement stopped. Really, I can't quite understand why it hasn't been thrown out already and I can't see the case lasting long once it does reach court.
I was rather disappointed in it also. I was expecting more details on the survey and was interested to see how it compared with the UK and the rest of Europe.
There is no need to set out to destroy SCO. If the lawsuit fails, or they abandon it the company will probably collapse, even if IBM (and others) don't pursue claims for damages.
Their stock price has risen dramatically because of the case. As soon as investors think that it's lost they'll sell as afast as they can.
Aren't there supposed to be rules concerning manipulating the stock market? Any chance SCO could fall foul of them?
They're not idiots because they don't understand PCs: they're idiots because they haven't taken any trouble to learn about them.
Part of the blame lies with PC and OS manufacturers and retailers. They usually provide some sort of CBT intro for new users, but will seldom highlight the pitfalls awaiting the unwary, because that might make their products look bad.
Of course, most people don't even read the handbook for their new car, so expecting them to learn the basics of their computer may be a bit much.
They've established a useful precedent of claiming to have evidence, but declining to release it for scrutiny. It's unreasonable to criticise Mr McBride simply for following the example of such great leaders.
I'm not sure what you mean by "a higher level of Darwinian selection" but I think your understanding of natural selection may be flawed.
Evolution operates on populations, but natural selection - the driving force for evolution - operates on individuals. It cares not one whit whether the rest of the biosphere suffers, provided that the individual's offspring have a better chance of reproducing than its competitors'. No long term view: individuals can do dumb things which we might clearly see are going to have disasterous effects down the line, but that won't make any difference to what happens now.
Also - and this isn't aimed at you, specifically - one needs to understand what natural selection is all about and it is NOT about producing a bigger/stronger/faster/smarter human. It's about what chicks want! (Since at present women tend to have the final say in partners, rather than men.)
In the modern, Western world, natural selection will be working in favour of those who are good looking, charming, wealthy. (Please bear in mind I'm single, so obviously don't have too clear an idea of what the lovely ladies seek in a mate.)
1. Who owns the genome? Is it moral for researchers to patent sequences of genetic code which are naturally occurring, in order that they can profit from them?
2. Should pharamceutical companies make a profit froom the Third World? The big drug companies sell some medicines at prices which Third World inhabitants cannot afford, so as not to risk grey imports back to the USA/Europe, where higher prices are affordable. This has been a particular concern with AIDS treatments.
3. Is it moral to conceal my identity? Whether on the Internet or "real" world, and including being anonymous or adopting a fictional persona.
I'm a motorcyclist, and I've had some experience of crashing.
First of all, I have grave reservations about whether this device will do all it claims. However, putting that aside I think that there are several major practical problems with it.
As some people have mentioned, many motorcyclists wear ruck sacks and belt pouches. I think that these are probably not a good idea with the D-Air, which will put a lot of people off. (I use a belt pouch as a safety measure: beter to have keys and stuff in there than in my pockets if I go sliding down the road.)
Clearly this is designed to be worn over clothing. But I wear different gear according to the season. In the summer I've got my leathers; in the winter a very bulky waterproof jacket. Can they make something like this sufficiently adjustable, or will I need two of them?
In the summer, I may also wear a waterproof oversuit. It's enough trouble to put the damn thing on without having to take off the D-Air first.
People ride different sorts of bikes. I'm usually fairly upright on my trailee, but someone on a sports bike could well be leant right over the tank. Is this jacket going to produce similar results in each case?
What about the poor pillion? "Pillion Pal" type handles are becoming quite popular, (that's a belt that the rider wears, with plastic handles for the pillion to hold onto), which will increase the liklihood of the two people being quite close together when the vest goes off.
This thing _may_ do some good, but overall I very much doubt that it's a sufficient improvement over good, armoured leathers to overcome the practical disadvantages.
Slashdot Mirror
Obviously you're poor and have never owned a new car. :-) An MOT isn't required until a vehicle is three years old.
A more likely option would be to imbed it in the tax disk. That would fit in well with SORN (Statutory Off-Road Notification: tells DVLA that the vehicle is not in use on public roads but hasn't been scrapped, so doesn't have to be taxed) and the recent announcement that the DVLA (people who administer road tax, amongst other things) will soon automatically send out fines to all registered keepers of un-taxed and un-SORNed vehicles.
The proposal doesn't say it's for additional monitoring: it's to replace the network used for the existing monitoring and other services. i.e. CCTV cameras on busy roads monitoring traffic flow; emergency telephones; variable traffic signs.
Whilst such a network could be used as part of a comprehensive traffic monitoring system that would require some sort of transponder in every vehicle, or a lot more cameras scanning (increasiongly false or obscured) licence plates.
As a habitual speeder, (only joking, officer) I wouldn't be keen on that sort of thing, but it hasn't come to that, yet. Of course the bastard Blunkett would love it - and not just for traffic offences.
Certainly, avoiding open war with Microsoft might be a reason. Another is probably the risk of failure.
If everybody thinks they're about to Linuxize their entire business, it will look bad if they don't. With lower expectations they can take advantage of whatever successes they do acheive.
I used to get that every Saturday afternoon - good quality, free coffee at work, you see. I eventually found that a nice big mug of Espresso in the morning would see me through the whole day. :-)
My own experience when I was a humble programmer, a couple of decades ago, was that Computer Science graduates were a pain in the arse on the whole, because they had a lot of fancy ideas which didn't match the commercial reality. (We were writing stock control, order entry and similar software for a major manufacturer.)
Maybe things are better now, or are better in the USA, (I'm in the UK), but speaking as a university drop-out I think that CIS/CS/whatever degrees are over-rated. Decent vocational training like wot I did is much more suitable for people just churning out code from a spec.
I see a certain amount of this on the lists I follow - IBM, rather than Sun - but it's always been the way. Everybody has to start somewhere so there have always been dumb questions. Why, I may have asked one or two myself in the past!
Mailing lists and the like work as a co-operative support network only whilst those with more expertise are willing to help those with less. If you can't be bothered to help out a newbie, it takes little effort to ignore them.
Sometimes I ignore these posts myself - I'm paid to do my job, not theirs after all - but to offset that I try to make sure that my sig includes links to the FAQ, Archive and other vital resources. So even if I don't answer a query directly, I'm at least helping people to help themselves.
Things may be a bit worse now than in the past: some of these people are under a lot of pressure for quick results with few resources - that's why they were hired in the first place! So they tend to try a scattershot approach, asking the same question all over the place in the hope that someone will give them a quick answer. Also, because of the sudden interest in this type of outsourcing there are a lot more new administrators about all of a sudden. But even so, it seems to me that it's rather petty to refuse them assistance whilst they're trying valiantly to get up to speed.
I remember seeing something like that a few years ago. Some adverts are made with the expectation of being fast-forwarded through and take care that the brand name is clearly visible even at 10x.
It's possible that things are slightly different between the USA and here in the UK. For a start, we have off-track betting all over the place.
Very occasionally, you'll find a bookmaker who gets it wrong and there is a set of bets that guarantee a positive outcome. That's extremely rare now as a fairly straightforward bit of software can prevent that sort of mistake.
I'm not really au fait with spread betting, but with other types of gambling the key is to remember that the book is NOT based on the liklihood of a given outcome, but the cost to the bookie of each outcome. If you know more than the other punters, you can win.
Of course, with some types of gambling - e.g. roulette, SCOX shares - the important piece of knowledge is not to bet at all.
If the current SCO didn't know about that, they might have a case against the people they bought the IP rights off for selling something that was not what it purported to be.
I'd expect SuSE will be available all across IBM's product line.
It already is, although it has to be the Enterprise version in some cases, which costs money.
Originally, IBM were supporting RedHat across the full hardware range, but it seems they've shifted the focus to SuSE.
They're also doing a lot of work on clustering, which has explicit support for Linux on their xSeries (Intel/AMD) boxes.
Isn't it important that the copyright owners are seen to be defending their IP? Otherwise, SCO could just turn around and say "Sure: Fred owns that bit of code but he doesn't really care about it, so the copyright's lapsed and we can do what the hell we like."
That might not be the case, and of course it's the sort of thing that could vary from one jurisdiction to another.
The Internet Dr Who has been common knowledge for ages and is not related to the new TV series, although it does give Richard E Grant a head start for the role of the new Doctor.
My understanding (IANAL, and I'm not an English lawyer at that) is that in copyright infringement cases, the plaintif should first be seeking rectification. i.e. To stop the infringement from taking place. In order to do so, SCO need to identify the infringement.
The fact that they have not done so is surely an indication that they do not want the infringement stopped. Really, I can't quite understand why it hasn't been thrown out already and I can't see the case lasting long once it does reach court.
I was rather disappointed in it also. I was expecting more details on the survey and was interested to see how it compared with the UK and the rest of Europe.
There is no need to set out to destroy SCO. If the lawsuit fails, or they abandon it the company will probably collapse, even if IBM (and others) don't pursue claims for damages.
Their stock price has risen dramatically because of the case. As soon as investors think that it's lost they'll sell as afast as they can.
Aren't there supposed to be rules concerning manipulating the stock market? Any chance SCO could fall foul of them?
There are two of them now, (the new one imaginatively bein galled "The Second Severn Crossing".)
It could refer to the river itself, of course, but that would be a bit of a bore.
http://www.severn-bore.co.uk/
They're not idiots because they don't understand PCs: they're idiots because they haven't taken any trouble to learn about them.
Part of the blame lies with PC and OS manufacturers and retailers. They usually provide some sort of CBT intro for new users, but will seldom highlight the pitfalls awaiting the unwary, because that might make their products look bad.
Of course, most people don't even read the handbook for their new car, so expecting them to learn the basics of their computer may be a bit much.
WARNING: You may be an idiot.
Click here for basic computer training.
They've established a useful precedent of claiming to have evidence, but declining to release it for scrutiny. It's unreasonable to criticise Mr McBride simply for following the example of such great leaders.
If the IBM bosses are NOT acting out of pure business interests, then they are not looking after their share-holders' interests.
:-)
Of course, there's nothing to say that they don't see a competitive advantage in being the good-guys for the first time in living memory.
I'm not sure what you mean by "a higher level of Darwinian selection" but I think your understanding of natural selection may be flawed.
Evolution operates on populations, but natural selection - the driving force for evolution - operates on individuals. It cares not one whit whether the rest of the biosphere suffers, provided that the individual's offspring have a better chance of reproducing than its competitors'. No long term view: individuals can do dumb things which we might clearly see are going to have disasterous effects down the line, but that won't make any difference to what happens now.
Also - and this isn't aimed at you, specifically - one needs to understand what natural selection is all about and it is NOT about producing a bigger/stronger/faster/smarter human. It's about what chicks want! (Since at present women tend to have the final say in partners, rather than men.)
In the modern, Western world, natural selection will be working in favour of those who are good looking, charming, wealthy. (Please bear in mind I'm single, so obviously don't have too clear an idea of what the lovely ladies seek in a mate.)
1. Who owns the genome?
Is it moral for researchers to patent sequences of genetic code which are naturally occurring, in order that they can profit from them?
2. Should pharamceutical companies make a profit froom the Third World?
The big drug companies sell some medicines at prices which Third World inhabitants cannot afford, so as not to risk grey imports back to the USA/Europe, where higher prices are affordable. This has been a particular concern with AIDS treatments.
3. Is it moral to conceal my identity?
Whether on the Internet or "real" world, and including being anonymous or adopting a fictional persona.
I'm a motorcyclist, and I've had some experience of crashing.
First of all, I have grave reservations about whether this device will do all it claims. However, putting that aside I think that there are several major practical problems with it.
As some people have mentioned, many motorcyclists wear ruck sacks and belt pouches. I think that these are probably not a good idea with the D-Air, which will put a lot of people off. (I use a belt pouch as a safety measure: beter to have keys and stuff in there than in my pockets if I go sliding down the road.)
Clearly this is designed to be worn over clothing. But I wear different gear according to the season. In the summer I've got my leathers; in the winter a very bulky waterproof jacket. Can they make something like this sufficiently adjustable, or will I need two of them?
In the summer, I may also wear a waterproof oversuit. It's enough trouble to put the damn thing on without having to take off the D-Air first.
People ride different sorts of bikes. I'm usually fairly upright on my trailee, but someone on a sports bike could well be leant right over the tank. Is this jacket going to produce similar results in each case?
What about the poor pillion? "Pillion Pal" type handles are becoming quite popular, (that's a belt that the rider wears, with plastic handles for the pillion to hold onto), which will increase the liklihood of the two people being quite close together when the vest goes off.
This thing _may_ do some good, but overall I very much doubt that it's a sufficient improvement over good, armoured leathers to overcome the practical disadvantages.