There's a good snippet from the article which explains why they went for wireless over wired:
WiFi is the perfect fit for the Island of Niue, where harsh weather conditions of rain, lightning, salt water, and high humidity cause major problems with underground copper lines
It later goes on to talk about 'cyclone season', so I guess you could safely add wind to that list. Watch the pringles cans fly off into the stratosphere!
It would be a win-win situation for them, and they can use their trademark to protect the 'purity'. I.E. if it's not "Pure java" it can't be called "Pure java".
This sounds similar to the the way O'Reilly uses its branding / trademark stuff with respect to Perl. If it's not really truly Perl it can't use the Camel.
I wonder if a similar thing could be done with the Linux name & penguin? Does Linus have copyrights on those that could be used to smack down dodgy distros?
Look at the URL of your source: http://www.abc.net.au/triplej/ozmusic/getplayed/de fault.htm.
It's just the Oz music show. If that policy were honestly and generally applied across JJJ I would actually listen to it. Instead 2SER is my station of choice (good reception here from directly underneath the transmitter, and drum n bass on a Saturday night).
If you're interested, there's a good book about payola here, or you could just watch John Safran reruns : )
More on the music selection process can be found here.
The selection process you linked to only applies to the Oz Music Show (which is supposed to play new Australian music), not to regular programming (which plays the usual guff).
For a more detailed explanation, visit http://www.importanceofphilosophy.com/Politics_Rig hts.html#RightToProperty.
Hmmm, interesting. It says that people have a right to such property as is required to support their life (e.g. warm winter clothing), and the right to own and use the products of their own labour.
Stealing from a rich person would not always violate that particular flavour of property rights. A CEO is typically paid way out of proportion to the labour he/she contributes to an enterprise his labour, and (arguably) accrues property unfairly by exploiting the labour of subordinates. For example, a PHB who makes programmers work 12 hour days for peanuts while doing little except run the business into the ground (I have worked in such a business, as you may have).
Some other examples would be people who accrue money (property) from an inheritance, or from the appreciation of assets they did not contribute labour towards. Or someone using price-fixing or other dodgy tactics in order to be reimbursed out of proportion to their labour.
I'm not simply spouting 'the party line' - I understand it, & welcome a rational discussion. Please don't start with an assumed ad-hominem
Fair enough. Launch every debate for great justice!
Also, what do you mean when you say 'slated for repressive use'? If someone is initiating force or fraud against others, then yes, confiscation of their means to do so may be reasonable. I say 'may', because you'd have to prove it in court.
Sure, assuming that the legal system provides a level playing field. Which it does not when big money or partisan judgement is involved. See MS antitrust case, RIAA price-fixing etc.
I assume however you extend that to cover monopolies etc. So, I ask you - when was the last time Microsoft intiated force against you to get you to buy one of their products? Given that they didn't, you have no right to demand the confiscation of any of their property.
Well, MS haven't forced me to buy anything per se, but it could be argued that they have 'stolen' from those that they have overcharged (i.e. been unfairly overpaid for their labour by way of bundling schemes), and illegally squeezed out competition (preventing competitors from being fairly reimbursed for their labour).
And they don't sell products anyway in the conventional sense, but licence them, retaining ownership. So if I 'buy' Windows from MS, my 'right' to property is not respected, as I don't really own the software that I have purchased.
But no, they haven't forced me to do anything, and it is not impossible to buy an OSless box and whack Linux on it -- for the technically adept, anyway. Regular users have a sort-of choice between Wintel and Mac/PPC bundles.
Now, in the case of IP violation where MS knowingly ripped off a Stac patent - that should have involved a hefty fine against MS, and criminal charges against the person(s) who okayed the product even though it was in violation of Stacs patent. Of course, this didn't happen, and *that's* wrong.
Yup.
Don't let your (possibly justified) hatred of Microsoft blind you to the underlying ethical issues.
That wasn't really what my post was about. I'm just suspicious of property rights as currently practised, i.e. more property == more rights.
If GCT actually does it, will the X-Prize folks accept their application after the fact?
From TFA: "We will be happy to reconsider your application when provided with evidence of the feasibility of your proposed technology. We strongly encourage GCT to continue with its research and keep us posted as developments warrant our attention," the letter states.
It's a very very very thick book in order to cover all variants. In my horror days of DHTML coding the first edition was my bible, and was never missing any information, no matter how obscure the client.
the supplier of the repair parts was reminded by Apple Computer's Legal Department that supplying to a computer manufacturer was a breach of contract
I wonder if it's okay to supply parts to a (non-business) individual, for 'DIY home repair'? Could be a good way to put together an OS X box on the cheap.
The only way we will get humans to Mars will be using nuclear propulsion and nuclear power sources(RTGs). Period.
Not so. Robert Zubrin's book
The Case For Mars outlines a very solid mission plan for getting there using existing chemical rocket technology, e.g. Energia or Saturn V.
Nuclear propulsion would be better, but it's not the only option.
Whenever I hear about SMS spam etc, it reminds me how happy I am not to have a mobile phone. Aside from the spam, you have the problem of being continually contactable by bosses, in-laws etc. It is nice to be able to read a book in the park and not be badgered by things that can wait until I am home.
Some may require one for business, but for the majority of people a mobile phone is an AIM-style novelty rather than a true necessity.
Comment not intended as a troll. Interesting replies welcome : )
Well, according to Sun, the reason they won't certify JBoss is just that JBoss won't cough up the (reasonable) money for testing. Core Developers might be more inclined to pay if they create their own fork.
Probably Sun will be the real winner as this encourages one fork or the other to give them some cash money. More bling bling gold chains for McNealy : )
I've said this before (when the original article was posted), but I still suspect the JBoss split is related to their Sun certification troubles.
There's an interesting ZDnet article here that talks about JBoss not being 100% kosher J2EE, and the main group's ongoing dispute with Sun. I think that the breakaway group intendeds to fork JBoss to make a more easily certified version, and this Slashback seems to support that somewhat.
Slashdot Mirror
There's a good snippet from the article which explains why they went for wireless over wired:
WiFi is the perfect fit for the Island of Niue, where harsh weather conditions of rain, lightning, salt water, and high humidity cause major problems with underground copper lines
It later goes on to talk about 'cyclone season', so I guess you could safely add wind to that list. Watch the pringles cans fly off into the stratosphere!
It would be a win-win situation for them, and they can use their trademark to protect the 'purity'. I.E. if it's not "Pure java" it can't be called "Pure java".
This sounds similar to the the way O'Reilly uses its branding / trademark stuff with respect to Perl. If it's not really truly Perl it can't use the Camel.
I wonder if a similar thing could be done with the Linux name & penguin? Does Linus have copyrights on those that could be used to smack down dodgy distros?
At first I thought your comment was an obscure Perl module.
Look at the URL of your source:e fault.htm.
http://www.abc.net.au/triplej/ozmusic/getplayed/d
It's just the Oz music show. If that policy were honestly and generally applied across JJJ I would actually listen to it. Instead 2SER is my station of choice (good reception here from directly underneath the transmitter, and drum n bass on a Saturday night).
If you're interested, there's a good book about payola here, or you could just watch John Safran reruns : )
More on the music selection process can be found here.
The selection process you linked to only applies to the Oz Music Show (which is supposed to play new Australian music), not to regular programming (which plays the usual guff).
But you're right about the music director.
Shit yeah. I'd buy the drum intros only, cut them up, and whack them straight into my S700. Instant drum n bass madness.
Ah, but you forget that being modded funny does not improve your karma.
Theoretically, with enough computers, it could be done in a few years.
:)
Or a few minutes on Peter Jackson's new set up
For a more detailed explanation, visit http://www.importanceofphilosophy.com/Politics_Rig hts.html#RightToProperty.
Hmmm, interesting. It says that people have a right to such property as is required to support their life (e.g. warm winter clothing), and the right to own and use the products of their own labour.
Stealing from a rich person would not always violate that particular flavour of property rights. A CEO is typically paid way out of proportion to the labour he/she contributes to an enterprise his labour, and (arguably) accrues property unfairly by exploiting the labour of subordinates. For example, a PHB who makes programmers work 12 hour days for peanuts while doing little except run the business into the ground (I have worked in such a business, as you may have).
Some other examples would be people who accrue money (property) from an inheritance, or from the appreciation of assets they did not contribute labour towards. Or someone using price-fixing or other dodgy tactics in order to be reimbursed out of proportion to their labour.
I'm not simply spouting 'the party line' - I understand it, & welcome a rational discussion. Please don't start with an assumed ad-hominem
Fair enough. Launch every debate for great justice!
Also, what do you mean when you say 'slated for repressive use'? If someone is initiating force or fraud against others, then yes, confiscation of their means to do so may be reasonable. I say 'may', because you'd have to prove it in court.
Sure, assuming that the legal system provides a level playing field. Which it does not when big money or partisan judgement is involved. See MS antitrust case, RIAA price-fixing etc. I assume however you extend that to cover monopolies etc. So, I ask you - when was the last time Microsoft intiated force against you to get you to buy one of their products? Given that they didn't, you have no right to demand the confiscation of any of their property.
Well, MS haven't forced me to buy anything per se, but it could be argued that they have 'stolen' from those that they have overcharged (i.e. been unfairly overpaid for their labour by way of bundling schemes), and illegally squeezed out competition (preventing competitors from being fairly reimbursed for their labour).
And they don't sell products anyway in the conventional sense, but licence them, retaining ownership. So if I 'buy' Windows from MS, my 'right' to property is not respected, as I don't really own the software that I have purchased.
But no, they haven't forced me to do anything, and it is not impossible to buy an OSless box and whack Linux on it -- for the technically adept, anyway. Regular users have a sort-of choice between Wintel and Mac/PPC bundles.
Now, in the case of IP violation where MS knowingly ripped off a Stac patent - that should have involved a hefty fine against MS, and criminal charges against the person(s) who okayed the product even though it was in violation of Stacs patent. Of course, this didn't happen, and *that's* wrong.
Yup.
Don't let your (possibly justified) hatred of Microsoft blind you to the underlying ethical issues.
That wasn't really what my post was about. I'm just suspicious of property rights as currently practised, i.e. more property == more rights.
Theft is immoral. Regardless of the identity of the victim, or the thief.
Why? Because it says so in the bible / libertarian party line?
Stealing resources slated for repressive use (for example) seems fairly moral to me.
If GCT actually does it, will the X-Prize folks accept their application after the fact?
From TFA:
"We will be happy to reconsider your application when provided with evidence of the feasibility of your proposed technology. We strongly encourage GCT to continue with its research and keep us posted as developments warrant our attention," the letter states.
It's a very very very thick book in order to cover all variants. In my horror days of DHTML coding the first edition was my bible, and was never missing any information, no matter how obscure the client.
Darl accidentally played his hand (or on purpose, who can tell with him) in an interview where he admitted that a buyout from IBM is "an option."
The article you're thinking of is here. Very interesting reading.
the supplier of the repair parts was reminded by Apple Computer's Legal Department that supplying to a computer manufacturer was a breach of contract
I wonder if it's okay to supply parts to a (non-business) individual, for 'DIY home repair'? Could be a good way to put together an OS X box on the cheap.
The only way we will get humans to Mars will be using nuclear propulsion and nuclear power sources(RTGs). Period.
Not so. Robert Zubrin's book The Case For Mars outlines a very solid mission plan for getting there using existing chemical rocket technology, e.g. Energia or Saturn V.
Nuclear propulsion would be better, but it's not the only option.
Tidal energy is dying, just like BSD. That is why no one is posting on this thread.
That, or the fact that this thread doesn't seem to be on the front page...
(Well, it doesn't for me, anyway. Your mileage may vary.)
P.S. Please, someone, tell me what I can do on a Segway that I cannot do on a bicycle.
Get fatter?
You then lose the benefits as well as the annoyances. Not owning a mobile is like having one that's switched off, but without the monthly fee...
Whenever I hear about SMS spam etc, it reminds me how happy I am not to have a mobile phone. Aside from the spam, you have the problem of being continually contactable by bosses, in-laws etc. It is nice to be able to read a book in the park and not be badgered by things that can wait until I am home.
Some may require one for business, but for the majority of people a mobile phone is an AIM-style novelty rather than a true necessity.
Comment not intended as a troll. Interesting replies welcome : )
Well, according to Sun, the reason they won't certify JBoss is just that JBoss won't cough up the (reasonable) money for testing. Core Developers might be more inclined to pay if they create their own fork.
Probably Sun will be the real winner as this encourages one fork or the other to give them some cash money. More bling bling gold chains for McNealy : )
I've said this before (when the original article was posted), but I still suspect the JBoss split is related to their Sun certification troubles.
There's an interesting ZDnet article here that talks about JBoss not being 100% kosher J2EE, and the main group's ongoing dispute with Sun. I think that the breakaway group intendeds to fork JBoss to make a more easily certified version, and this Slashback seems to support that somewhat.
Perhaps April 1st would be a better deadline.
It's called YABASIC and is also available for Unix and Windows.
Now if IBM would just sue Kevin Bacon, you'd really have something there...
That's the way it's spelt, dude. Like radium, plutonium etc.