Has anyone mentioned Tucows already? If not it's where I generally look for freeware/shareware. Their listings and mirrors tend to be pretty good, but it was based closed to where I live so not everyone might have as good of luck with the mirrors, I don't really know.
Tea isn't more popular than Coke or Pepsi I'm fairly sure, especially if you consider all of the other sodas made by both companies. Regardless, no one tea company can make even a fraction of the money Coke or Pepsi makes.
Oh my god, you've got to be joking. C# and Java murder performance compared to C++. They're ok if the key is to develop quickly. They're bad if the key is to run quickly. So Intel should be pushing hard for more Java and C# since it'll help drive processor demand.
And guess, what, YES, there are problems which are easier to program in C++ than in C#. My job is mostly programming in C# and I'd rather be programming in C++.
There is NO one right programming language or even one right type of programming language.
Can you point to any real statistics that show that the Mac OS installed base has dropped like you claim? I've been seeing more Macs lately, not less (possibly an exception being in the last year or two while they were dying for a serious chip upgrade).
The motor is on the wing. If you want to go out there and try and mess with it feel free, but I doubt you'll have much luck. The jet engines themselves are probably the least accessible part of the plane.
The wires don't resist the yoke, if you read the article. The computer controls the direction the plane is turning and just refuses to turn into a no fly zone or I imagine turns away from the no fly zone if the plane is heading straight towards it. So either you shut off the computer somehow and therefore have no control over the plane or you avoid the no fly zones.
And this isn't like opening up your computer's case and switching some wires around. First you have to find out what wires you need to disconnect, which I imagine won't be easy, then you'd have to figure out how to get to them, etc.
I would imagine (though I don't actually know this of course) that in a modern plane where the navigation system is run all electronically, that there would be part of it which wasn't in the cockpit and accessible to this sort of attack, in fact I would imagine the smart thing to do would be to put the actual computer somewhere else with just a terminal accessible, meaning the computer would stay online and steer away fromt he no fly zone all the same. Perhaps this could be used with a control from the ground kind of system in as a backup? Of course no system is infallible, but this sounds like a fairly tough system to get around.
What if someone rich in Romania or China needed to use your bank account to hide millions of dollars in to protect from an impending coup d'etat and was willing to split it with you?
My gut reaction to this article would be that it's bad because it prevents a lot of scientific knowledge which could be important, but you make a good point about crappy science.
My main problem with this though, is that I would think that instead of erring on the side of caution when it comes to science though, they should be more willing to risk erring on the side of the defendant, since proof beyond reasonable doubt (or clear and convincing proof depending on the case) is required, and if someone has reasonable scientific evidence in their defense, which may not be one hundred percent accepted, they should be able to use it. Obviously it should have to have some sound basis, but I think there should at least be more a little more leeway given on the defense side.
Of course, this is assumes you believe that it's better to set an innocent man free than send a guilty one to jail.
So true. God I wish we had a totalitarian government so someone could finally crush all those selfish people under his boot and make them be altruistic.
What a load of horse shit. There are no major third parties because people don't vote for them enough. There are no laws preventing more parties. Those two parties remain because people have supported them over time, i.e. people CHOSE them. I'm sorry if our democracy doesn't meet your requirements, but if you want it be better you should convince people to support a third party so that we can break away from this two party system. Oh wait, if it's not a democracy it doesn't matter if people want a third party, does it?
cowered in fear and aggression? That might be a bit much of a gross generalization, no? I'm an American, but I'm honestly not the slightest bit nervous about terrorism. I'm much more likely to die of cancer or heart disease, but I'm not worried about those either honestly.
And the US public does have might, because they can get rid of any elected official, and elected officials control the US military, which has a very good sized horde of nuclear weapons. Of course, the American people rarely care enough to flex their voting muscle. That's a whole other issue though.
All I really wanted to do is point out that you really shouldn't assume that all Americans are the way the Bush administration wants us to be (fearful and aggressive).
If you give away your software you can't really think of it as your property anymore, i.e. Linux doesn't belong to hackers. Regardless, "general hackers" aren't electronics manufacturers. So why should general hackers dictate what the standards and requirements for Linux on this kind of device is? This organization isn't meant to get input from the hackers, it's meant to make specifications that the coders can choose to implement or not implement.
I really don't think it will make too much difference one way or the other as far as getting a job, as long as it's presented right. If you're applying for a non-technical job where you would be using MS software, I doubt they would be impressed by the fact that you knew non-MS alternatives, though I doubt they would hold it against you too much as long as you said that you pointed out that you had experience in very similar programs. On the other hand if people only know open source alternatives and go into a job interview and start trying to convert the interviewer that's probably not going to help them.
Ideally I think schools should have a variety of platforms for students to learn on, including Windows, Linux and OS X. Flexibility means being able to work on a variety of platforms, not just being able to work on a non-MS platform, after all.
Unless DRM is embedded thoroughly into the OS, like in Palladium then there will always be non-DRM players. Therefore if you want to play non-DRM content you can. Where does the lock in come from? I own a lot of CD's and a number of devices which play cds but I'm not locked into them (ie, I still have an iPod and a few MD players).
If they start raising the prices too high, just stop buying their stuff! And don't buy anything that you think they might try to charge you again for later (like through required software updates).
"Not everything is a slppery slope, but this is, unfortunately."
Back this up please, because despite a lot of ranting people having done on/., I'm not seeing it, unless you define DRM as the MPAA's, the RIAA's and Microsoft's optimal vision of DRM. Evaluating a whole idea based on only the most extreme possible cases limits progress, among other things.
Not everything is a slippery slope, and why is DRM in limited amounts bad? I don't care if someone wants offer movie rentals online that can only be watched once as long as I can still buy a copy that I can watch as many times as I want from someone else. Of course, I have a problem with some of the shadier DRM issues, but this isn't one of them.
People have been complaining incessently that the RIAA and MPAA need to update their business models to incorporate the internet. By opposing DRM in all it's forms though, you are preventing that from happening. Here's something that may be a startling fact to some people - companies don't like giving away their products for free. Creating a system of marketing digital media cheaply online will require a way of regulating the sharing of those files. You can't have it both ways, because if people can steal the media they will and if people steal the media the companies who produce that media are going to fight it.
Am I looking forward to Palladium? Certainly not. I am in favor of limited DRM though. Honestly, as long as it doesn't start limiting my rights to use and share documents which aren't protected by DRM or invading my privacy (neither of which necessarily follows from the definition of DRM), I don't really see it as a bad thing.
I'm not so cynical about Apple. There's a big difference between the iTunes music store and what Microsoft and Disney want to happen. The iTunes music store lets you use those files on up to three computers and allows you to burn them as many times as you want and put them on your iPod, etc. Considering you can stream songs, listen to them as many times as you want on more than one computer, I see this as pretty reasonable. I imagine Apple had to really go to bat with the record companies to get that much too.
Apple is typically better to their customers, because they have to be. Microsoft has shown a lack of respect for their customers fairly consistently and get away with it because people don't see much alternative at the moment. Also, Apple's embracing the open source community, though perhaps not to the degree that some would like (though I think it's a good balance of open and closed source). Their ties to the open source community I would think make them more likely to refuse to implement TCPA.
The problem Apple is going to face though, is will Apple users be able to open TCPA encrypted documents? Apple, along with Linux, the BSD's, and any other non Microsoft platform need to oppose this so that Microsoft can't lock alternative platforms' users out of all documents created through Microsoft apps.
Slashdot Mirror
Hmmm... screw cell phones, how about WiFi? I'd much rather have WiFi on a plane than a cell phone and other people using it wouldn't really bother me.
Has anyone mentioned Tucows already? If not it's where I generally look for freeware/shareware. Their listings and mirrors tend to be pretty good, but it was based closed to where I live so not everyone might have as good of luck with the mirrors, I don't really know.
The beauty of hypocrisy is you can practice it, decry it, and admit it all at the same time.
I'm pretty sure MS SQL Server would automatically convert the string to an int.
Tea isn't more popular than Coke or Pepsi I'm fairly sure, especially if you consider all of the other sodas made by both companies. Regardless, no one tea company can make even a fraction of the money Coke or Pepsi makes.
And guess, what, YES, there are problems which are easier to program in C++ than in C#. My job is mostly programming in C# and I'd rather be programming in C++.
There is NO one right programming language or even one right type of programming language.
Why has nobody suggested ++c++?
Can you point to any real statistics that show that the Mac OS installed base has dropped like you claim? I've been seeing more Macs lately, not less (possibly an exception being in the last year or two while they were dying for a serious chip upgrade).
The wires don't resist the yoke, if you read the article. The computer controls the direction the plane is turning and just refuses to turn into a no fly zone or I imagine turns away from the no fly zone if the plane is heading straight towards it. So either you shut off the computer somehow and therefore have no control over the plane or you avoid the no fly zones.
And this isn't like opening up your computer's case and switching some wires around. First you have to find out what wires you need to disconnect, which I imagine won't be easy, then you'd have to figure out how to get to them, etc.
And a missile can blow up a plane too. The terrorists on 9/11 were working with box cutters.
I would imagine (though I don't actually know this of course) that in a modern plane where the navigation system is run all electronically, that there would be part of it which wasn't in the cockpit and accessible to this sort of attack, in fact I would imagine the smart thing to do would be to put the actual computer somewhere else with just a terminal accessible, meaning the computer would stay online and steer away fromt he no fly zone all the same. Perhaps this could be used with a control from the ground kind of system in as a backup? Of course no system is infallible, but this sounds like a fairly tough system to get around.
What if someone rich in Romania or China needed to use your bank account to hide millions of dollars in to protect from an impending coup d'etat and was willing to split it with you?
Grates cheese AND out performs a dual Xeon system? And people say Mac's aren't bargains.
My main problem with this though, is that I would think that instead of erring on the side of caution when it comes to science though, they should be more willing to risk erring on the side of the defendant, since proof beyond reasonable doubt (or clear and convincing proof depending on the case) is required, and if someone has reasonable scientific evidence in their defense, which may not be one hundred percent accepted, they should be able to use it. Obviously it should have to have some sound basis, but I think there should at least be more a little more leeway given on the defense side.
Of course, this is assumes you believe that it's better to set an innocent man free than send a guilty one to jail.
So true. God I wish we had a totalitarian government so someone could finally crush all those selfish people under his boot and make them be altruistic.
They'd probably get protested by /.'ers who got their name confused with DRM.
What a load of horse shit. There are no major third parties because people don't vote for them enough. There are no laws preventing more parties. Those two parties remain because people have supported them over time, i.e. people CHOSE them. I'm sorry if our democracy doesn't meet your requirements, but if you want it be better you should convince people to support a third party so that we can break away from this two party system. Oh wait, if it's not a democracy it doesn't matter if people want a third party, does it?
And the US public does have might, because they can get rid of any elected official, and elected officials control the US military, which has a very good sized horde of nuclear weapons. Of course, the American people rarely care enough to flex their voting muscle. That's a whole other issue though.
All I really wanted to do is point out that you really shouldn't assume that all Americans are the way the Bush administration wants us to be (fearful and aggressive).
If you give away your software you can't really think of it as your property anymore, i.e. Linux doesn't belong to hackers. Regardless, "general hackers" aren't electronics manufacturers. So why should general hackers dictate what the standards and requirements for Linux on this kind of device is? This organization isn't meant to get input from the hackers, it's meant to make specifications that the coders can choose to implement or not implement.
Ideally I think schools should have a variety of platforms for students to learn on, including Windows, Linux and OS X. Flexibility means being able to work on a variety of platforms, not just being able to work on a non-MS platform, after all.
If they start raising the prices too high, just stop buying their stuff! And don't buy anything that you think they might try to charge you again for later (like through required software updates).
Back this up please, because despite a lot of ranting people having done on /., I'm not seeing it, unless you define DRM as the MPAA's, the RIAA's and Microsoft's optimal vision of DRM. Evaluating a whole idea based on only the most extreme possible cases limits progress, among other things.
People have been complaining incessently that the RIAA and MPAA need to update their business models to incorporate the internet. By opposing DRM in all it's forms though, you are preventing that from happening. Here's something that may be a startling fact to some people - companies don't like giving away their products for free. Creating a system of marketing digital media cheaply online will require a way of regulating the sharing of those files. You can't have it both ways, because if people can steal the media they will and if people steal the media the companies who produce that media are going to fight it.
Am I looking forward to Palladium? Certainly not. I am in favor of limited DRM though. Honestly, as long as it doesn't start limiting my rights to use and share documents which aren't protected by DRM or invading my privacy (neither of which necessarily follows from the definition of DRM), I don't really see it as a bad thing.
Apple is typically better to their customers, because they have to be. Microsoft has shown a lack of respect for their customers fairly consistently and get away with it because people don't see much alternative at the moment. Also, Apple's embracing the open source community, though perhaps not to the degree that some would like (though I think it's a good balance of open and closed source). Their ties to the open source community I would think make them more likely to refuse to implement TCPA.
The problem Apple is going to face though, is will Apple users be able to open TCPA encrypted documents? Apple, along with Linux, the BSD's, and any other non Microsoft platform need to oppose this so that Microsoft can't lock alternative platforms' users out of all documents created through Microsoft apps.
Does the defendant lack the ability to sign up for a hotmail account? Blacklists are either too restrictive or too easy to get around.