The Turing test should hold true on audio. Anyone ever tried using voice recognition software/speech-to-text software? Even if it was a computer listening in with this software, there's a good chance that the computer is going to get it wrong anyway.
And in our practice proceedings I have to make Daubert motions quite often. It really helps when you have a scientist/doctor (anyone who is going to give scientific/medical/technical testimony) and you know they don't know what they're talking about. It's really nothing more than a chance to examine their knowledge on certain subjects pertaining to what they're testifying on.
I'm a musician, and the lack of good music recording/processing software on Linux was what had kept me from jumping ship years ago when I first learned how to use it.
Can Linux switchers get commercials like those annoying Mac ones too?
It seems like the author of the Byte.com article has lost sight of the participants in this suit -- IBM and SCO, not Linux and SCO. He keeps referring to the source code copied into the Linux kernel, but IBM doesn't own the Linux kernel. The only way IBM could be liable for this was if that Unix source code came out of AIX and not another *nix system. That's impossible to prove, even if it were true. And any OTHER technology derived from Unix but not written into the original AT&T version (which SCO presumably "owns") is not SCO's IP but the IP of whoever/whatever wrote it. Thus, if my understanding of the argument laid out in some of these articles is correct (and I'm not sure it is, this is starting to get confusing) then SCO is trying to claim that their IP extends to include ANY derivative work from the parts of Unix they own, no matter who wrote them or how this person/entity licensed these works.
Theoretically, under this model, the descendents of Johann Gutenberg now get to sue every book publisher in the world for not paying them royalties on the IP of printable-format books. Wow. Time to hit the family tree records!
Microsoft still has the freedom to write whatever software they wish however they wish. Regardless of what SA does with their laws, Microsoft is a United States corporation, organized under US laws, and they do business (well, more or less) by the US model of open markets.
Basically, you can't force Microsoft to comply with standards. That's unfair to them as a company. You can, however, just not use their stuff until it comes in line with standards on its own. Otherwise, you're just as totalitarian and evil as M$. And no one wants that.
Good idea, but I don't think it's exactly legal to have a monetary penalty for companies who write proprietary/non-compliant software. You just don't buy their stuff, and if they want your business, they'll have to adapt or go out of business. So, switching to open-source might eventually force Microsoft to head that way, but charging them a fee for non-compliance with this policy is antithetical to an open market.
Compassionate conservativism - (kum-pash-shun-it kon-surv-ah-tiv-iz-uhm) [from the Bush campaign of 2000, Am.] - n. 1. A mythical theory by which conservatives are believed to have hearts. 2. Bombing a country and then making them pay you to rebuild it for them.
Slashdot Mirror
I was going to design a Slashdot t-shirt, but the DMCA got me first.
Terrorist #2: Yes, I see we have. And it appears to be hack-proof. We cannot fly into it.
T1: Then let us simply turn off all electronics in the plane and coast into the target!
T2: You are infinitely smart! Now let us kill ourselves!
T1: YIPEE!
The Turing test should hold true on audio. Anyone ever tried using voice recognition software/speech-to-text software? Even if it was a computer listening in with this software, there's a good chance that the computer is going to get it wrong anyway.
Oh... THOSE evil geniuses!
And in our practice proceedings I have to make Daubert motions quite often. It really helps when you have a scientist/doctor (anyone who is going to give scientific/medical/technical testimony) and you know they don't know what they're talking about. It's really nothing more than a chance to examine their knowledge on certain subjects pertaining to what they're testifying on.
Oh yes... HAWTALTA! Definition here.
It's my preciousssss...
Can Linux switchers get commercials like those annoying Mac ones too?
Mr. President, ready those troops. We have another liberation mission to pursue.
What? Not funny anymore? Guess I'll go hang myself then.
Theoretically, under this model, the descendents of Johann Gutenberg now get to sue every book publisher in the world for not paying them royalties on the IP of printable-format books. Wow. Time to hit the family tree records!
1. An evil empire
2. Lots and lots of money and coders to do the bitch work necessary to thwart google.
3. Resistence is futile. Assimilation is assured.
Oh wait... you were just trolling!
Basically, you can't force Microsoft to comply with standards. That's unfair to them as a company. You can, however, just not use their stuff until it comes in line with standards on its own. Otherwise, you're just as totalitarian and evil as M$. And no one wants that.
Good idea, but I don't think it's exactly legal to have a monetary penalty for companies who write proprietary/non-compliant software. You just don't buy their stuff, and if they want your business, they'll have to adapt or go out of business. So, switching to open-source might eventually force Microsoft to head that way, but charging them a fee for non-compliance with this policy is antithetical to an open market.
That's nitrous gas, not hydrogen, you ninny.
Chapter 4: Why No One Will Ever Need More than 4MB of RAM
Is "liek" like "Lief," the name of a Viking?
Compassionate conservativism - (kum-pash-shun-it kon-surv-ah-tiv-iz-uhm) [from the Bush campaign of 2000, Am.] - n. 1. A mythical theory by which conservatives are believed to have hearts. 2. Bombing a country and then making them pay you to rebuild it for them.
Actually, radio stations license the material from record companies to play it over the air. 90% of music is not broadcast for free.
[sound of crickets chirping]
Not funny, huh? Oh well. [shoots self]