Don't use N... that sounds too much like a countable, natural number.
It's usually more like: We have N employees, each of them has at least one workstation, plus 0 to M old/test machines under his desk. Half of those secondary machines have been reinstalled once or twice, again half of those re-installs included an OS upgrade. Those were done using the OEM licences included with the new primary machines, as on those primary machines software licencsed by the companys volume licence has been used.
Now triple that for OS, Office and the software you're doing your actiual work with. (probably MSDev or some CAD or whatever.)
As a bottom line, you may know how many licencses you have in your volume licence, but won't know how many licences came bundled or not bundled with the hardware. And you won't know how many you actually need..
Wasn't the android phones meant to be the openish alternative to the wall^H^H^H^Hputrid compost offered by Apple?
No.
The Android operating system was meant to be an openish alternative for the phone manufacturers. It's up to them to repeat apples ways by walling up their phones too.
Butthey shouldn't forget that people who trade in a stable system with a hand-picked selection of possibel apps for a locked down system tend to buy an iPhone in the first place.
I understand how someone can decide not to officially support modding since that could translate into more costs, but actually investing time and money to prevent modding?
It would make sense if -and only if - motorola plans selling the efuse as security feature. I don't know if there is an actual thread of evil spies flashing your phone with bugged firmware while you're sleeping (or more likely: while you're distracted by that hot russian/chinese/whatever girl/guy on your buissness trip).
But wheather it's a security feature or just a matter of truth in advertising: There should be a big red sticker on top of the box. "Warning! Contains self destruct mechanism". Sometimes it's not enough to put larks vomit in the fine print next to monosodiumglutamate.
I own one and it gives exactly the same gaming experience as back in the good 'ol days of my beloved C64. (From the time I got rid of those floppy Quickshots IV)
While computers have significant issues with subtraction, I am positive someone can find a solution to this monumental problem. After all the algorithm, while clearly complex seems solvable if only networked computers could connect to some remote resource to discover new information occasionally.
The problem is that this will rise when the next leap second is scheduled. When GPS started, GPS Time was identical to UTC. And leap seconds aren't based on a regular pattern but on the irregulatories of earths movement.
So it's good enough for relative time or within a system that agreed to use GPS time instead of UTC. Any other setup would require constant manual intervention. (at least minitoring of International Earth Rotation and Reference Systems Services announcments)
At least according to our history textbooks, the increasing poverty after the great depression, the very failure of corporations, was a big factor in the rise of fascism. Lots of poor people willing to support anyone for empty promises.
Look at how Saddam or AlQuaida buy the support of the local population by building a few schools and hospitals. If you have the chance to get your kids pneumonia treated in a hospital, you probably wouldn't care much about civil liberties.
Yes, it has been stopped, for now. But not by the gouvernment but by the constitutional court. Politics already trying to modify it just enough to be not in violation of the constitution.
The acting data protection official from Hamburg may be speaking for germany here. Facebooks (and Googles) german office is in Hamburg, and data protection laws are a state (and not a federal) matter. (The cities of Hamburg, Berlin and Bremen are states on their own)
So this guy might be the only one actually having a case against Facebook.
OTOH, the allies were resonable enough to turn a a large enough blind eye to all the small fish. Prosecuting each and every "nazi" would have been a bit out of proportion, as almost everyone was forced into the military, or the party or some party organization. "Von der Wiege bis zur Bahre". It was a goal to get everyone into those organizations. So if they had try to lock up each party "member", 80% of the population would have ended up in prison.
And the other half of those privacy concerns comes from the exact opposite: The fear of the possibility of having a group singled out again, based on some stored data.
But we were too concerned with beeing afraid of state-run data-mining, that we didn't notice the big companies doing it already. Only over the last few years (GP mentione the Telekom affair) this is swinging back.
This guy can't even give coherent examples on why "piracy" is bad because he treats them like physical property.
You're missing something. That's the whole point of copyright legislation, treading an immaterial piece of work like a material piece of work, to let "artists" take part in an economical system that's based on the trade of physical goods.
But when I copy something, I'm not depriving someone of an original. If someone said "Hey, can I take your screwdriver for a few seconds, scan it in my computer and have my 3-D printer make me a replica?" I'd say sure. That is the closest thing to "piracy" in the physical world.
Yes, but the economy we're forced to live in and cope with (unless you're living on a self sustained farm) simply doesn't work for on scarse goods. We did well without copyright as long as there was the concept of an Allmende (similar to common land, but without even thinkng of that it is owned by someone at all) around. Songs and stories were kind of scarse, as they couldn't be reproduced easily by people outside the trade. (A story retold by your elder brother was less exciting then hearing it from a professional storyteller) - and there wasn't such a thing as an "author" at all! Stories were created by telling, re-telling and modifying old stories by the performes themselves.
It's no wonder that during the early modern period, (someone already mentiond: when playwrights were piss-poor) the concept of mass-production slowly started to take off (first manufactories, if not book-printing, there were already xylographs) it deemed sensible to integrate ideas and concepts into the economical cycle.
That worked quite well as long as those immaterial goods made up only a small percantage of the traded volume, but today, as more and more things are "virtual" and manual labor is worth less and less, the economy has to adopt somehow. Otherwise we will first see paradoxes like in TFA 1, and finally an imploding economy. It will collapse when "money" isn't backed and supported by countable goods with a price tag.
1There is one in TFA. The composer wants his work to be as spread as possible as helives onhis reputation, but OTOH is required to keep his work as scarce as possible to monetize a demand. That's the actual problem with copyright.
I actually like how LaTeX is not WYSIWYG. Concentrating on content and then finally compile it into something ready for a professional Printshop, so I'm nor arguing on that or a general markup system.
It may be a personal thing, but I prefer the clarity of XML. I already gave a few examples of the inconsistencies of TeX markup a few postings down.
<foo> ALWAYS starts a block and </foo> ALWAYS ends one. And there is no other way to start a block, and no such thing as a lone opening tag. (just a way to abbreviate empty blocks)
Special Characters ALWAYS start with & and you know you can read on until the ;
LaTeX has fantastic results, mut the markup has no logic whatsoever!
why is it \begin{document} and \begin{center}, but \section{title} and NOT \begin{section} ? So I not only have to remember the keywords, but also tons of stuff about their usage!
And it is NOT easy to read for humans when half of the quotation marks actually start quotes, but the other half marks umlauts!
If TeX is unreadable, XML is unwritable and unreadable. At any rate, TeX itself is low-level, and when you use a package like LaTeX it becomes far more user-friendly.
It rather raises the bar from unusable to barely usable
Slashdot Mirror
It's fairly sickening.
Yes.
But at least you have a clue about how many licences you have, and how many you need.
But it would be fair to either optionally block overusage ur give the user a big, fat warning label. "Login in will cause overusage".
OTOH, some shops may prefer a more flexible pay-as-you-use model.
...or a software licenced per concurrent user,controlled by a dedicated server.
Don't use N... that sounds too much like a countable, natural number.
It's usually more like: We have N employees, each of them has at least one workstation, plus 0 to M old/test machines under his desk. Half of those secondary machines have been reinstalled once or twice, again half of those re-installs included an OS upgrade. Those were done using the OEM licences included with the new primary machines, as on those primary machines software licencsed by the companys volume licence has been used.
Now triple that for OS, Office and the software you're doing your actiual work with. (probably MSDev or some CAD or whatever.)
As a bottom line, you may know how many licencses you have in your volume licence, but won't know how many licences came bundled or not bundled with the hardware. And you won't know how many you actually need..
Probably yes, but "slightly restriced" wouldnt reflect the sometimes arbitrary selection (or rather non-selection) of some apps.
Wasn't the android phones meant to be the openish alternative to the wall^H^H^H^Hputrid compost offered by Apple?
No.
The Android operating system was meant to be an openish alternative for the phone manufacturers. It's up to them to repeat apples ways by walling up their phones too.
Butthey shouldn't forget that people who trade in a stable system with a hand-picked selection of possibel apps for a locked down system tend to buy an iPhone in the first place.
I understand how someone can decide not to officially support modding since that could translate into more costs, but actually investing time and money to prevent modding?
It would make sense if -and only if - motorola plans selling the efuse as security feature. I don't know if there is an actual thread of evil spies flashing your phone with bugged firmware while you're sleeping (or more likely: while you're distracted by that hot russian/chinese/whatever girl/guy on your buissness trip).
But wheather it's a security feature or just a matter of truth in advertising: There should be a big red sticker on top of the box. "Warning! Contains self destruct mechanism". Sometimes it's not enough to put larks vomit in the fine print next to monosodiumglutamate.
I'm driving a Seat, you insensitive clod!
I own one and it gives exactly the same gaming experience as back in the good 'ol days of my beloved C64. (From the time I got rid of those floppy Quickshots IV)
While computers have significant issues with subtraction, I am positive someone can find a solution to this monumental problem. After all the algorithm, while clearly complex seems solvable if only networked computers could connect to some remote resource to discover new information occasionally.
Well.. it's called NTP.
Yeah. I read it up a few minutes after posting...
i stand corrected.
- 12 seconds
The problem is that this will rise when the next leap second is scheduled. When GPS started, GPS Time was identical to UTC. And leap seconds aren't based on a regular pattern but on the irregulatories of earths movement.
So it's good enough for relative time or within a system that agreed to use GPS time instead of UTC. Any other setup would require constant manual intervention. (at least minitoring of International Earth Rotation and Reference Systems Services announcments)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leap_second
A GPS receiver will be useless as the GPS time currently is (IIRC) 12 seconds ahaed of UTC.
GPS doesn't honor leap seconds. This behaviour is by design as it's quite hard to halt the sattelites orbits for a second.
At least according to our history textbooks, the increasing poverty after the great depression, the very failure of corporations, was a big factor in the rise of fascism. Lots of poor people willing to support anyone for empty promises.
Look at how Saddam or AlQuaida buy the support of the local population by building a few schools and hospitals. If you have the chance to get your kids pneumonia treated in a hospital, you probably wouldn't care much about civil liberties.
http://yro.slashdot.org/story/10/03/02/1254212/German-Data-Retention-Law-Ruled-Unconstitutional?from=rss&utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+Slashdot%2Fslashdot+(Slashdot)&utm_content=Google+Reader
Yes, it has been stopped, for now. But not by the gouvernment but by the constitutional court. Politics already trying to modify it just enough to be not in violation of the constitution.
more of that story would be available in german.
The acting data protection official from Hamburg may be speaking for germany here. Facebooks (and Googles) german office is in Hamburg, and data protection laws are a state (and not a federal) matter. (The cities of Hamburg, Berlin and Bremen are states on their own)
So this guy might be the only one actually having a case against Facebook.
for a good measure of it, probably yes.
OTOH, the allies were resonable enough to turn a a large enough blind eye to all the small fish. Prosecuting each and every "nazi" would have been a bit out of proportion, as almost everyone was forced into the military, or the party or some party organization. "Von der Wiege bis zur Bahre". It was a goal to get everyone into those organizations. So if they had try to lock up each party "member", 80% of the population would have ended up in prison.
And the other half of those privacy concerns comes from the exact opposite: The fear of the possibility of having a group singled out again, based on some stored data.
But we were too concerned with beeing afraid of state-run data-mining, that we didn't notice the big companies doing it already. Only over the last few years (GP mentione the Telekom affair) this is swinging back.
a few thousand euros is FAR from any serious fine for something as large as facebook.
Nope. No class actions over here.
Also it's a fine, no damage, so it'll be payable only once.
This guy can't even give coherent examples on why "piracy" is bad because he treats them like physical property.
You're missing something. That's the whole point of copyright legislation, treading an immaterial piece of work like a material piece of work, to let "artists" take part in an economical system that's based on the trade of physical goods.
But when I copy something, I'm not depriving someone of an original. If someone said "Hey, can I take your screwdriver for a few seconds, scan it in my computer and have my 3-D printer make me a replica?" I'd say sure. That is the closest thing to "piracy" in the physical world.
Yes, but the economy we're forced to live in and cope with (unless you're living on a self sustained farm) simply doesn't work for on scarse goods. We did well without copyright as long as there was the concept of an Allmende (similar to common land, but without even thinkng of that it is owned by someone at all) around. Songs and stories were kind of scarse, as they couldn't be reproduced easily by people outside the trade. (A story retold by your elder brother was less exciting then hearing it from a professional storyteller) - and there wasn't such a thing as an "author" at all! Stories were created by telling, re-telling and modifying old stories by the performes themselves.
It's no wonder that during the early modern period, (someone already mentiond: when playwrights were piss-poor) the concept of mass-production slowly started to take off (first manufactories, if not book-printing, there were already xylographs) it deemed sensible to integrate ideas and concepts into the economical cycle.
That worked quite well as long as those immaterial goods made up only a small percantage of the traded volume, but today, as more and more things are "virtual" and manual labor is worth less and less, the economy has to adopt somehow. Otherwise we will first see paradoxes like in TFA 1, and finally an imploding economy. It will collapse when "money" isn't backed and supported by countable goods with a price tag.
1There is one in TFA. The composer wants his work to be as spread as possible as helives onhis reputation, but OTOH is required to keep his work as scarce as possible to monetize a demand. That's the actual problem with copyright.
perhaps a cute one......
I actually like how LaTeX is not WYSIWYG. Concentrating on content and then finally compile it into something ready for a professional Printshop, so I'm nor arguing on that or a general markup system.
It may be a personal thing, but I prefer the clarity of XML. I already gave a few examples of the inconsistencies of TeX markup a few postings down.
<foo> ALWAYS starts a block and </foo> ALWAYS ends one. And there is no other way to start a block, and no such thing as a lone opening tag. (just a way to abbreviate empty blocks)
Special Characters ALWAYS start with & and you know you can read on until the ;
LaTeX has fantastic results, mut the markup has no logic whatsoever!
why is it \begin{document} and \begin{center}, but \section{title} and NOT \begin{section} ? So I not only have to remember the keywords, but also tons of stuff about their usage!
And it is NOT easy to read for humans when half of the quotation marks actually start quotes, but the other half marks umlauts!
Oh.. this seems to be room 12A. I was looking for abuse, not an argument
Isn't that solved by now?
And isn't there a quite entertaining book by Simon Singh about it?
oh.. of course I forgot
\startfoo
content
\stopfoo
as yet ANOTHER method to mark text
If TeX is unreadable, XML is unwritable and unreadable. At any rate, TeX itself is low-level, and when you use a package like LaTeX it becomes far more user-friendly.
It rather raises the bar from unusable to barely usable