First off, my 300-disc Sony changer has been well worth the money. I only wish it had a serial interface so I could easily command it by computer. Many have complained about the poor interface, but a couple hours of work was enough to put together a Postgres database and an HTTP servlet interface. YMMV based on programming experience;-).
Once all my CDs were stored centrally, I really just wanted to put the cases out of the way, but keep them easily accessible. I found the wonderful storage boxes at Bags Unlimited. I purchased a couple of the plastic 100-CD boxes and alphabetized my CDs into them. Now they're nice and organized. I never have trouble finding the liner I want in a minute or two, and they don't take up much space.
I've had hand problems (tendinitis) in the past, and have absolutely loved my DataDesk SmartBoard. Here are the key points:
1. Nice key action. You get a good click. Of course this makes it a bit noisy.
2. The key layout is slightly better than a normal keyboard. The stagger of the keys is removed, so they all sit in lines along the movements of your joints. The first week was frustrating while I made typing errors. After that, I found that I typed a bit faster with a lot less finger movement. I don't have any trouble using other keyboards.
I paid about $80 for mine, which is pretty reasonable for an ergonomic keyboard. I consider it one of the best computer purchases I've ever made: I can type all day without ever having hand troubles. I've never had that experience with any other keyboard.
I'm not affiliated with DataDesk at all. I'm just a very happy customer!
The real problem is that you're probably using port 80 for something other than what it's explicit purpose. Port 80 is the domain of HTTP, which has its own set of rules.
As long as you're using HTTP, the "payload" is all that matters! A proxy is certainly not required to route anything anywhere! It's your fault--not your ISP's--that you choose to disregard the other relevant standards. If you would embrace the DNS standard, HTTP standard and the routing standard, you'd have no troubles.
I'm a BSD enthusiast, and concur with the other posts that state that Linux compat is nearly perfect. For most OSS, you won't even notice the difference (except that it's easier to get software running, due to the Ports system). Also, consider that most linux apps are really just unix apps, and can be compiled natively in FreeBSD.
Just a word of warning, if you're interested in running Oracle for Linux on your BSD box, you probably won't get it to work. There's a howto that will get Oracle 8.0 running on FreeBSD, but I'm not aware of anyone getting 8i or 9i to run on a FreeBSD installation. The main problem seems to be Oracle's Java-based installer. Linux Java on FreeBSD is generally very good, but Oracle's installer doesn't quite make it.
It's important to note that Bush's administrative authority here only covers the applications of federal money in research. His decision will hurt research by many scientists, but doesn't prohibit anyone in the private sector from doing what they want with stem cells. That would require bills to be passed by the Congress.
Bush's move (provided that it lasts) will impede the growth of knowledge and lead to even more privatization and patenting of important fundamental research. It's fairly certain that big medicine will continue to develop new lines of cells, as the payoffs for genetic technologies may be tremendous.
The whole point of the "Baby Bill" scenario is that different divisions of M$ would not be able to cooperate any longer. Browser and internet services would be able to communicate with the operating system, but ONLY through public and well-documented APIs. The mozilla project would have to have the same low-level access to a more-open Windows 2002 as the IE team.
This would also apply to the Office division: they would no longer benefit from the close tie-ins with the parent Microsoft. They would be prohibited by law from neglecting a linux version just to protect their parent M$.
The baby bill breakup method is just one of a set of ways that M$ might have to open up its API system and development process.
While Office might continue to dominate the market, it would only be because it is a superior product, which it currently is. If open source beats it, it's because open source is better. No court decision will ever compel people to use inferior products just because they're "not proprietary."
At least in the state of Oregon, it is explicitly illegal to have a television screen within view of the driver, even if turned off. In-dash displays would definitely illegal to drive with, and probably even illegal to sell. IANAL, but it's in the Oregon Driver's Manual. Similar laws probably exist elsewhere.
Ever since the comment about artificial bustlines and subliminal messages, things are becoming much clearer. It is now clear to me that the compression inherent in the MP3 format likely thwarts the record industry's attempts to hide subliminal messages in the songs of artists.
No longer can the major record companies sell subliminal advertising, or use subliminal techniques to raise revenue. They will be limited to including the AOL 5.0 software on the unused portion of their discs.
This is not a windows problem. This is AOL deliberately doing something to get exactly the result that they want. Sure, better structure and protection in the Windows OS could have prevented this Trojan horse, but just remember that it IS a trojan horse.
If you were to look at the NSA website, you would see that the NSA is a division of the CIA, with a specific purpose: It handles signals interception and processing. You can conjecture all you'd like about the real things that go on at the NSA, but officially they are for only communications intelligence.
The rest of the CIA is responsible for many traditional spy activities, eg. sattelite surveillance and inside infiltration. If you need to hear what somebody says on their cellphone, the NSA can hook you up. It'll also give you a printout of all of their e-mail traffic. If you wanted to bug their house, you'd talk to a different department.
Don't underestimate the wide-ranging knowledge that they intercept, but they're not the whole spy effort.
In gqmpeg, the general preference tab allows you to "enable Window Manager decorations. This will let you do exactly what you want. Coincidentally, if you use enlightenment, you can override the border settings of any window, with about a dozen types to choose from.
Democracy could not evolve into communism. Democracy is people making decisions that require community effort. This could never be replaced with a system for the destruction of individual property, because they are fundamentally different.
Today, a team of open-source programmers posted a new beta of BrainEMU, the open-source software that emulates the human brain. The head programmer explains that his motives are both political, as well as technological: "If we can manage to make BrainEMU the thought-extender of choice, all discourse and future thought will be deriviative works of a GPL work, finally ensuring the end to the encroaching Patent Machine.
"For that reason, we are struggling to provide the highest-quality in human biological emulation."
Release changes for the new beta:
* Emotional thought now supported * Fine motor control optimized and vastly improved * Support for Creative Environmental Voice included * Bug fixes: * No longer crashes when one tries to say "hello" * Embarrassment turns face red, rather than eyes * Colors correspond more accurately to closed regions in the vision module * Taste seems to be working again (broken in beta 9)
Remember, BrainEMU is still beta software. The authors assume no responsibility for any personality defects, mental disorders, poor job performance, erectile dysfunction [check the power cable], shortness of breath of total failure experienced as a result of this product.
The Turing machine is the benchmark for logical completeness. When you write a language, it is either Turing complete, or it is not. If you have Turing completeness, then you have a "complete" language, that you can essentially make do whatever you want.
It is quite important to realize that this does not mean that YOU can do whatever you want, however. If you don't believe me, try recoding the linux kernel in assembly. The speed benefits will be amazing. Waste of time? Because you are incapable of formulating the complete logic system necessary to build a kernel. Assembly certainly has the power to tell the computer to do ANYTHING. You simply don't have the mental or time resource to command it properly in this case.
I'll comment less on the connection to human languages. There is a certainly a similarity, but I will leave it to those who claim to know linguists to debate this.
The relevant crimes are patent and copyright infringement. DeCSS is in court because the authors purportedly violated copyright restrictions by reverse engineering some code, which is a copyright violation. Your recipe is different, though. Recipes are patentable, but not copyrightable: they describe a physical process for making something.
You could patent your recipe, if you showed that it was somehow a unique formula (eg. it makes cookies softer in a way that nobody else knows how). As long as no trespass were committed (digital or physical), you would have no case, as you have no protection on your recipe, unless you patent, which allows you a predetermined amount of time.
IANAL, but I believe that I understand this distinction. I shall assume no responsibility if your recipes (or other trade secrets) are stolen and you have no recourse.
This point of contention demonstrates the root of my critique.
Fourier transforms are usually framed in the complex field, but in real-world applications, one starts with a real function, and ends with a real function. The fact that our sine and cosine functions are intimately related to the properties of complex numbers shows how many parts of mathematics are equivalent, and therefore unpatentable.
Wiles used a problem in algebraic topology to prove the seemingly unrelated property of integers that x^n + y^n != z^n, for positive x, y, z and n > 2.
Having said the above, if the actual patent is for a specific hardware design, as some have said, then this may be a good case for a patent. My concern lies in the concept that one might patent pure mathematics. Depending on the actual claim of the patent, which is purportedly unavailable, I may the support this patent.
I support the principle of patents, but there are some problems with current law. If pure mathematics is patentable, it is time for the revolution.
In 1872, Dedekind and Cauchy published constructions of the Real numbers. All properties of our numbers are derived from the fact that there is exists unique ordered field containing the rationals that has no gaps (eg. sqrt(2)). The no gaps axiom is formally built as the existence of a least upper bound for every set bounded above. We call this set the Reals. (Check an analysis book if you're interested in this).
An interesting fact about mathematics is that all the properties of our reals are a consequence of this definition. While the patent law allows for the patent of discoveries and inventions, mathematics is quite different, for one simple reason: there's nothing new here.
Allowing a patent on a detail of an already-well-known system of numbers allows for impossible legal paradoxes. Assume that y = 6x is patentable. Someone gets a patent, and I decide that I want to get a patent on y = instantaneous rate of change of 3x^2, after discovering that it has some of the same useful properties. Another person comes along and patents the y = the second derivative of x^3, one the same premise.
This seems ridiculous, but the pharmaceutical companies do something very similar constantly in patent cases: they invent similar drugs that use slightly different chemicals. It's not the effect that's patentable, but the exact structure. Mathematics is all the effect of its basic axioms, so there must be no patent on pure mathematics.
In a campaign promise yesterday, Al Gore promised that, if and only if he is elected president, he will continue to allow the world to use the internet, despite infringement on his patent.
When questioned about his outlandish claim to hold a patent on all forms of network traffic, Gore looked shocked and stated that "I don't think that the American public will second-guess me after I singlehandedly fixed the Y2K bug!."
Slashdot Mirror
Once all my CDs were stored centrally, I really just wanted to put the cases out of the way, but keep them easily accessible. I found the wonderful storage boxes at Bags Unlimited. I purchased a couple of the plastic 100-CD boxes and alphabetized my CDs into them. Now they're nice and organized. I never have trouble finding the liner I want in a minute or two, and they don't take up much space.
1. Nice key action. You get a good click. Of course this makes it a bit noisy.
2. The key layout is slightly better than a normal keyboard. The stagger of the keys is removed, so they all sit in lines along the movements of your joints. The first week was frustrating while I made typing errors. After that, I found that I typed a bit faster with a lot less finger movement. I don't have any trouble using other keyboards.
I paid about $80 for mine, which is pretty reasonable for an ergonomic keyboard. I consider it one of the best computer purchases I've ever made: I can type all day without ever having hand troubles. I've never had that experience with any other keyboard.
I'm not affiliated with DataDesk at all. I'm just a very happy customer!
The real problem is that you're probably using port 80 for something other than what it's explicit purpose. Port 80 is the domain of HTTP, which has its own set of rules.
As long as you're using HTTP, the "payload" is all that matters! A proxy is certainly not required to route anything anywhere! It's your fault--not your ISP's--that you choose to disregard the other relevant standards. If you would embrace the DNS standard, HTTP standard and the routing standard, you'd have no troubles.
Google has exclusions, site and link queries too.
See http://www.google.com/help/refinesearch.html
I'm a BSD enthusiast, and concur with the other posts that state that Linux compat is nearly perfect. For most OSS, you won't even notice the difference (except that it's easier to get software running, due to the Ports system). Also, consider that most linux apps are really just unix apps, and can be compiled natively in FreeBSD.
Just a word of warning, if you're interested in running Oracle for Linux on your BSD box, you probably won't get it to work. There's a howto that will get Oracle 8.0 running on FreeBSD, but I'm not aware of anyone getting 8i or 9i to run on a FreeBSD installation. The main problem seems to be Oracle's Java-based installer. Linux Java on FreeBSD is generally very good, but Oracle's installer doesn't quite make it.
Think vector graphics vs. bitmaps?
Wanna know how to make chlorine gas quick:
bleach + ammonia (windex)
I believe there about a dozen deaths a year of housewives who stumble upon this combination.
It's important to note that Bush's administrative authority here only covers the applications of federal money in research. His decision will hurt research by many scientists, but doesn't prohibit anyone in the private sector from doing what they want with stem cells. That would require bills to be passed by the Congress.
Bush's move (provided that it lasts) will impede the growth of knowledge and lead to even more privatization and patenting of important fundamental research. It's fairly certain that big medicine will continue to develop new lines of cells, as the payoffs for genetic technologies may be tremendous.
You fail to mention that OOG is a machine-language guru!
So,
Now that I've got my S/390, does anybody know how to set up a beowulf cluster between these 40,000 machines? It's like a dream come true.
The whole point of the "Baby Bill" scenario is that different divisions of M$ would not be able to cooperate any longer. Browser and internet services would be able to communicate with the operating system, but ONLY through public and well-documented APIs. The mozilla project would have to have the same low-level access to a more-open Windows 2002 as the IE team.
This would also apply to the Office division: they would no longer benefit from the close tie-ins with the parent Microsoft. They would be prohibited by law from neglecting a linux version just to protect their parent M$.
The baby bill breakup method is just one of a set of ways that M$ might have to open up its API system and development process.
While Office might continue to dominate the market, it would only be because it is a superior product, which it currently is. If open source beats it, it's because open source is better. No court decision will ever compel people to use inferior products just because they're "not proprietary."
At least in the state of Oregon, it is explicitly illegal to have a television screen within view of the driver, even if turned off. In-dash displays would definitely illegal to drive with, and probably even illegal to sell. IANAL, but it's in the Oregon Driver's Manual. Similar laws probably exist elsewhere.
Ever since the comment about artificial bustlines and subliminal messages, things are becoming much clearer. It is now clear to me that the compression inherent in the MP3 format likely thwarts the record industry's attempts to hide subliminal messages in the songs of artists.
No longer can the major record companies sell subliminal advertising, or use subliminal techniques to raise revenue. They will be limited to including the AOL 5.0 software on the unused portion of their discs.
This is not a windows problem. This is AOL deliberately doing something to get exactly the result that they want. Sure, better structure and protection in the Windows OS could have prevented this Trojan horse, but just remember that it IS a trojan horse.
The rest is still valid, though. Just rechecked that little bit; it's indeed independent.
If you were to look at the NSA website, you would see that the NSA is a division of the CIA, with a specific purpose: It handles signals interception and processing. You can conjecture all you'd like about the real things that go on at the NSA, but officially they are for only communications intelligence.
The rest of the CIA is responsible for many traditional spy activities, eg. sattelite surveillance and inside infiltration. If you need to hear what somebody says on their cellphone, the NSA can hook you up. It'll also give you a printout of all of their e-mail traffic. If you wanted to bug their house, you'd talk to a different department.
Don't underestimate the wide-ranging knowledge that they intercept, but they're not the whole spy effort.
In gqmpeg, the general preference tab allows you to "enable Window Manager decorations. This will let you do exactly what you want. Coincidentally, if you use enlightenment, you can override the border settings of any window, with about a dozen types to choose from.
Democracy could not evolve into communism. Democracy is people making decisions that require community effort. This could never be replaced with a system for the destruction of individual property, because they are fundamentally different.
Slashdot Headline, 2030:
Today, a team of open-source programmers posted a new beta of BrainEMU, the open-source software that emulates the human brain. The head programmer explains that his motives are both political, as well as technological: "If we can manage to make BrainEMU the thought-extender of choice, all discourse and future thought will be deriviative works of a GPL work, finally ensuring the end to the encroaching Patent Machine.
"For that reason, we are struggling to provide the highest-quality in human biological emulation."
Release changes for the new beta:
* Emotional thought now supported
* Fine motor control optimized and vastly improved
* Support for Creative Environmental Voice included
* Bug fixes:
* No longer crashes when one tries to say "hello"
* Embarrassment turns face red, rather than eyes
* Colors correspond more accurately to closed regions in the vision module
* Taste seems to be working again (broken in beta 9)
Remember, BrainEMU is still beta software. The authors assume no responsibility for any personality defects, mental disorders, poor job performance, erectile dysfunction [check the power cable], shortness of breath of total failure experienced as a result of this product.
The Turing machine is the benchmark for logical completeness. When you write a language, it is either Turing complete, or it is not. If you have Turing completeness, then you have a "complete" language, that you can essentially make do whatever you want.
It is quite important to realize that this does not mean that YOU can do whatever you want, however. If you don't believe me, try recoding the linux kernel in assembly. The speed benefits will be amazing. Waste of time? Because you are incapable of formulating the complete logic system necessary to build a kernel. Assembly certainly has the power to tell the computer to do ANYTHING. You simply don't have the mental or time resource to command it properly in this case.
I'll comment less on the connection to human languages. There is a certainly a similarity, but I will leave it to those who claim to know linguists to debate this.
The relevant crimes are patent and copyright infringement. DeCSS is in court because the authors purportedly violated copyright restrictions by reverse engineering some code, which is a copyright violation. Your recipe is different, though. Recipes are patentable, but not copyrightable: they describe a physical process for making something.
You could patent your recipe, if you showed that it was somehow a unique formula (eg. it makes cookies softer in a way that nobody else knows how). As long as no trespass were committed (digital or physical), you would have no case, as you have no protection on your recipe, unless you patent, which allows you a predetermined amount of time.
IANAL, but I believe that I understand this distinction. I shall assume no responsibility if your recipes (or other trade secrets) are stolen and you have no recourse.
This point of contention demonstrates the root of my critique.
Fourier transforms are usually framed in the complex field, but in real-world applications, one starts with a real function, and ends with a real function. The fact that our sine and cosine functions are intimately related to the properties of complex numbers shows how many parts of mathematics are equivalent, and therefore unpatentable.
Wiles used a problem in algebraic topology to prove the seemingly unrelated property of integers that x^n + y^n != z^n, for positive x, y, z and n > 2.
Having said the above, if the actual patent is for a specific hardware design, as some have said, then this may be a good case for a patent. My concern lies in the concept that one might patent pure mathematics. Depending on the actual claim of the patent, which is purportedly unavailable, I may the support this patent.
I support the principle of patents, but there are some problems with current law. If pure mathematics is patentable, it is time for the revolution.
In 1872, Dedekind and Cauchy published constructions of the Real numbers. All properties of our numbers are derived from the fact that there is exists unique ordered field containing the rationals that has no gaps (eg. sqrt(2)). The no gaps axiom is formally built as the existence of a least upper bound for every set bounded above. We call this set the Reals. (Check an analysis book if you're interested in this).
An interesting fact about mathematics is that all the properties of our reals are a consequence of this definition. While the patent law allows for the patent of discoveries and inventions, mathematics is quite different, for one simple reason: there's nothing new here.
Allowing a patent on a detail of an already-well-known system of numbers allows for impossible legal paradoxes. Assume that y = 6x is patentable. Someone gets a patent, and I decide that I want to get a patent on y = instantaneous rate of change of 3x^2, after discovering that it has some of the same useful properties. Another person comes along and patents the y = the second derivative of x^3, one the same premise.
This seems ridiculous, but the pharmaceutical companies do something very similar constantly in patent cases: they invent similar drugs that use slightly different chemicals. It's not the effect that's patentable, but the exact structure. Mathematics is all the effect of its basic axioms, so there must be no patent on pure mathematics.
MUSCATINE, Iowa, Jan 22, 2000
In a campaign promise yesterday, Al Gore promised that, if and only if he is elected president, he will continue to allow the world to use the internet, despite infringement on his patent.
When questioned about his outlandish claim to hold a patent on all forms of network traffic, Gore looked shocked and stated that "I don't think that the American public will second-guess me after I singlehandedly fixed the Y2K bug!."