What I think they meant to convey is that this will be a worse case scenario they can use for testing the practicality of using ODF in a non-ODF world.
But I don't actually think so...
Whereas I think this will be great for ODF, as the NAA will have to produce heaps conversion software to convert many formats to ODF but because they are an archiving operation, they won't ever have to convert back. Instead, I imagine that the common document format for outgoing files from of the archive will most likely be PDF...
This scenario won't test the ability for ODF in collaborative work among entities, something that I would see as the worst case scenario needed to test the practicality of using this format.
Having said all of that - to hell with everyone else - I have been using non Microsoft formats (first Star Office formats and now ODF) for five years now and rarely come across a problem. Then again, I am a simple user so I wouldn't expect too much grief. From my experience advising other people I can see that the true hurdle is not the file format, rather the application. Word and Excel are automated from so much business and scientific software that people just expect the results of their query or analysis to be dumped directly into their spreadsheet or word processor. So until Quicken or MYOB support something other that MS software, or until alternative software is produced that does, business will largely use MS.
On the other hand I strongly recommend to people to use OOo at home and with the ever increaseing compatability that OOo has with MS formats, this is not a bad option.
I thought the music industry wanted variable pricing for music, and it was Apple that wanted to keep prices fixed at $0.99/song.
You are confusing price setting with price fixing. Most forms of price setting are legal - ultimately a manufacturer decides how much they want to charge for their product. Manufacturers cannot, however, legally dictate the final retail price (well, this is true in Australia). Of course, they can always could scuttle $0.99 downloads by refusing to sell tracks to apple under $0.99.
Price fixing is when different companies in the same industry collude to artificially set the prices of goods at a price far higher than what normal market forces would dictate. It is usually difficult to prove as you need evidence of the collusion part. In production of goods, when a competitor raises prices, you can either maintain prices, hoping to steal market share or you can cash in by raising your prices too! In the music industry, the end products are not exact matches for each other - artists are generally not marketed under different labels so you would be incredibly stupid to try to steal market share!
In many respects, selling music is the perfect encapsulation of Capitalism - "screw the customer for whatever you can!" - and as long as we keep paying what they ask, the labels will continue to do so.
I always found MS to be a pain in the arse. The last time I ever tried dealing with MS went like this.
Me: G'day, I would like to report a bug in Windows XP.
MS: Yeah sure, can I have your credit card number please?
Me: Sorry? What do you need that for?
MS: Oh, we charge you a support fee and if it turns out to be a real bug we will refund your money.
Me: Look, I can assure you that this is a real bug. I am trying to help you by reporting it. I don't understand why I have to pay.
MS: Sorry, sir. That's the away it works. Can I have some credit card details please?
Me: No. I actually don't have a credit card [I really didn't]. Couldn't I just explain it to you and you will see that this is a bug.
MS: I don't know anything about computers sir, I just take the credit card details and refer you onto a technician.
Me: Oh, can't you refer me anyway? [prempting the answer] Or at least put me onto a supervisor who can?
MS: No, it doesn't work that way. If you can't pay for the support call sir, I am afraid we can't help you...
I still cringe when I think that they expected to be paid by me for me to report a bug! Needless to say they never found out what the problem was which then took me the best part of a day to work out.
For the record it was a glitch in networking. I had two network connections are set up, one an Ethernet connection and the other a dial up, set to dial automatically on no network. When I was disconnected from the network, the bloody OS would try to dial to access the loopback address! In the end I had to work around to problem by setting my dial-up to a manual dial.
If not I think you better go watch The Life of Brian and come back to remove the egg off your face.
My particular love for this joke is irony of looking into a room of Monty Python fans and they are all sitting there chuckling and repeating that very same line.
Just to make it clear how the court sees it because you are used to thinking of the right to distribute internally...
Programmer A writes his code for corporation B it is clearly a derived work of CorelDraw for Windows. He distributes it using their sms server to all the employees. Employee C gets it. She asks whether she is licensed for Corel. She is not. She contacts Corel which sues the corporation for distributing a copy of Corel Draw to C in violation of their license terms. What is B's defense?
This doesn't make any sense at all. Programmer A writes code for Corporation B. The code is based on a GPLed source (created by Programmer Z), so Programmer A is entitled to use it. What you don't understand is that the agreement that Programmer A works under is "work for hire" to Corporation B. This automatically assigns all copyright of the derivative work to Corporation B. Corporation B distributes it to all employees, one of whom is Employee C. As an employee, Employee C is indistinguishable from Corportation B, the copyright holder. Employee C contacts the owner of the original source, Programmer Z, who then contacts Corportation B. Corporation B explains that the code has not been distributed and Programmer Z agrees. Corporation B fires the arse off Employee C for being such a dipshit.
There realy is no moral justification to attack civilians because your too coward to attack the military or government.
To the contrary, the (implied) point of the original poster was that there is no moral right to attack anybody, except in defence.
In the next two paragraphs you cite the separation of the constituents from the government as a defence against killing civilians. I would rather argue that the specificity of the attack is proportional to the level of technology held by the attacker. To this day, I have heard few objections the the mass of civilian deaths as a result of the bombings of London and (worse) Berlin during WWII.
When someone thinks random killing is moraly justified it lets the rest of us know how fucked the world is.
Acts of terrorism are hardly random. In fact if you delete the the word "random" from that last sentence, I think you would have got it right.
As an Australian (we're next I have no doubts), I have been distanced from the emotional side of having my country members blown to smithereens. By using the sliver of extra objectivity this allows, I can see that you could hardly expect anything different from the extremists. Look at this from the other side, if GWB, Blair and Little Johnny Howard want to wage war on terror, then they need to expect that terror will wage war back. This is all the GP post was stating - the extremists see the coalition as the aggressors and that they are acting in "self defence".
I had much trouble explaining this point of view during "911" and I fully expect this to be modded as a troll too but whereas the coalition says that "they started it" by blowing up the WTC, the extremist will point to the US foreign policy for years preceding the attack.
The age old adage applies, "If you can't stand the heat, get out of the kitchen" - something I have been maintaining that my government do all along. Hopefully they will listen before the attack hits here (I don't fancy being blown up in a train).
Either that, or they're REALLY DAMN GOOD at getting hold of some fledgling outbreak
I suspect that many of these "fledgling outbreaks" that the AV companies most quickly defeat are the variants that have just been edited by script kiddies.
Tweak the engine a little and viola, they have defeated a virus in 10 minutes!
1) The gas store/s. This is the bottles of gas used to top up the system as the oxygen levels become depleted. This gas can be air, pure oxygen, nitrox (basically air with a larger percentage of oxygen added to it), trimix (a specialised mixture of nitrogen, oxygen and helium) or heliox (oxygen/heium mixture).
2) The scrubber. This canister is scrubs out any carbon dioxide exhaled by the diver.
2) The airbag (sometime refered to as a lung). This stores the air being scrubbed in a bag at ambient pressure, which is all that is required to be able to physically breathe. As the diver descends, the air in the airbag compresses and gets topped up from the gas bottles. As the dive surfaces, the air expands and an over inflation valve releases the excess gas.
As always it is way more complicated than what I described, depending on whether you are talking closed circuit or semi-closed circuit kit - but that is the basics.
Oh yeah,
I think these also have trouble delivering at any significant pressure, thus the low-depth limitations.
Not quite - as I mentioned the gas in the air bladder is at ambient - what limits depth with semi-closed circuit rebreathers (which are far more prevalent) is that the oxygen content is usually much higher than normal air. Oxygen becomes significantly toxic at a partial pressure of 1.6 ATM, which occurs at ~ 66m (220ft) breathing air or just 6m (20ft) with pure oxygen.
I have scuba dived since 1982 and I am rarely limited by the amount of O2 I have handy.
Because I like decompression diving, air supply is still the number one limiting factor to my dives. I still don't think this will be useful.
That is why modern scuba uses pressure delivery systems... I don't see how the contraption can both be small and deliver at a high pressure while operating off of one battery. Even at ~32 feet you are at 1 atmosphere extra pressure.
I call bullshit! First, pressure delivery systems are a direct consequence of storing air under pressure na d the reason why that is done is the convenience of have all that air in an itsy bitsy bottle! Second, the contraption will automatically create air at ambient pressure (which is all you need to be able to breathe). Third, at 10m (~33 ft) you are at 2ATM pressure, not 1ATM!
The main reason this is useless is due to the following calculation...
At the surface, 1 ATM, to fill one one shallow breath (~3 litres) you would need to process 5 / 0.015 = 200 litres of seawater. Take that down to 20m (66ft - 3 ATM) and that becomes 600 litres, because the gas compresses under the pressure of the water. Now consider that a relatively fit adult might have as many as 15 of these breaths a minute! - 9000 litres a minute of seawater!
Do a relatively technical dive down to 50m (6ATM) and I reckon the guy using that kit would be picking his buddy out of the water inlet!
Additionally,
Pure O2 is poisonous below about 32feet, if I remember correctly and if you go below about 100feet, just depending you can get high. Go google, "rapture of the deep."
1) This system extracts AIR, not oxygen. 2) Oxygen has little to do with nitrogen narcosis, aka "rapture of the deep".
Log in to the machine as an administrator and turn on system auditing! Then use regedt32 to setup auditing on the HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE, logging only failures. It won't be long before you will be able to use the event viewer to see EXACTLY what registry keys the app is attempting to access.
The thing that gives me the shits is that people like you think that you have the skills to do my job and because the PHBs don't know any better, I get paid SFA for my time and knowledge!
And he's gonna find out the specific registry keys the application accesses how, exactly?
After years searching, the slashdotter brings their first girlfriend home only to have her look at the ceiling over the bed and scream, "I'm leaving you PERVERT!"
Among the Gartner Group's key findings were that the ATO should develop an open-source policy and review procurement processes to better enable the evaluation, selection and sharing of open-source software.
It looks like someone at Gartner is going to get fired when big Billy finds out that theey have broken ranks!
then someone using your program isn't licensed to modify it.
But from the microsoft licence we have:
A "Licensed Implementation" means only those specific portions of a software product that read and writes files that are fully compliant with the specifications for the Office Schemas.
IANAL but this means to me that if the XML reader/writer was compiled as a library, all parts of your program except for the XML library could be under any licence you like!
Provided it complied with the MS specification, who would want to go around changing the file formatting code anyway?
Slashdot Mirror
Of course that all depends on whether or not the blindness we get from wanking is caused by degraded eyes or degraded brains...
What I think they meant to convey is that this will be a worse case scenario they can use for testing the practicality of using ODF in a non-ODF world.
But I don't actually think so...
Whereas I think this will be great for ODF, as the NAA will have to produce heaps conversion software to convert many formats to ODF but because they are an archiving operation, they won't ever have to convert back. Instead, I imagine that the common document format for outgoing files from of the archive will most likely be PDF...
This scenario won't test the ability for ODF in collaborative work among entities, something that I would see as the worst case scenario needed to test the practicality of using this format.
Having said all of that - to hell with everyone else - I have been using non Microsoft formats (first Star Office formats and now ODF) for five years now and rarely come across a problem. Then again, I am a simple user so I wouldn't expect too much grief. From my experience advising other people I can see that the true hurdle is not the file format, rather the application. Word and Excel are automated from so much business and scientific software that people just expect the results of their query or analysis to be dumped directly into their spreadsheet or word processor. So until Quicken or MYOB support something other that MS software, or until alternative software is produced that does, business will largely use MS.
On the other hand I strongly recommend to people to use OOo at home and with the ever increaseing compatability that OOo has with MS formats, this is not a bad option.
You are confusing price setting with price fixing. Most forms of price setting are legal - ultimately a manufacturer decides how much they want to charge for their product. Manufacturers cannot, however, legally dictate the final retail price (well, this is true in Australia). Of course, they can always could scuttle $0.99 downloads by refusing to sell tracks to apple under $0.99.
Price fixing is when different companies in the same industry collude to artificially set the prices of goods at a price far higher than what normal market forces would dictate. It is usually difficult to prove as you need evidence of the collusion part. In production of goods, when a competitor raises prices, you can either maintain prices, hoping to steal market share or you can cash in by raising your prices too! In the music industry, the end products are not exact matches for each other - artists are generally not marketed under different labels so you would be incredibly stupid to try to steal market share!
In many respects, selling music is the perfect encapsulation of Capitalism - "screw the customer for whatever you can!" - and as long as we keep paying what they ask, the labels will continue to do so.
I always found MS to be a pain in the arse. The last time I ever tried dealing with MS went like this.
Me: G'day, I would like to report a bug in Windows XP.
MS: Yeah sure, can I have your credit card number please?
Me: Sorry? What do you need that for?
MS: Oh, we charge you a support fee and if it turns out to be a real bug we will refund your money.
Me: Look, I can assure you that this is a real bug. I am trying to help you by reporting it. I don't understand why I have to pay.
MS: Sorry, sir. That's the away it works. Can I have some credit card details please?
Me: No. I actually don't have a credit card [I really didn't]. Couldn't I just explain it to you and you will see that this is a bug.
MS: I don't know anything about computers sir, I just take the credit card details and refer you onto a technician.
Me: Oh, can't you refer me anyway? [prempting the answer] Or at least put me onto a supervisor who can?
MS: No, it doesn't work that way. If you can't pay for the support call sir, I am afraid we can't help you...
I still cringe when I think that they expected to be paid by me for me to report a bug! Needless to say they never found out what the problem was which then took me the best part of a day to work out.
For the record it was a glitch in networking. I had two network connections are set up, one an Ethernet connection and the other a dial up, set to dial automatically on no network. When I was disconnected from the network, the bloody OS would try to dial to access the loopback address! In the end I had to work around to problem by setting my dial-up to a manual dial.
Sun machine running Solaris 10 vs Dell running Windows.
Ah, OK - even if the Dell machine isn't certified for Solaris, why didn't Sun compare Windows with Windows or Linux with Linux?
Improves their performance maybe?
Move along, nothing to see here.
If not I think you better go watch The Life of Brian and come back to remove the egg off your face.
My particular love for this joke is irony of looking into a room of Monty Python fans and they are all sitting there chuckling and repeating that very same line.
Yes, yes we are all individuals!
Classic!
This doesn't make any sense at all. Programmer A writes code for Corporation B. The code is based on a GPLed source (created by Programmer Z), so Programmer A is entitled to use it. What you don't understand is that the agreement that Programmer A works under is "work for hire" to Corporation B. This automatically assigns all copyright of the derivative work to Corporation B. Corporation B distributes it to all employees, one of whom is Employee C. As an employee, Employee C is indistinguishable from Corportation B, the copyright holder. Employee C contacts the owner of the original source, Programmer Z, who then contacts Corportation B. Corporation B explains that the code has not been distributed and Programmer Z agrees. Corporation B fires the arse off Employee C for being such a dipshit.
To the contrary, the (implied) point of the original poster was that there is no moral right to attack anybody, except in defence.
In the next two paragraphs you cite the separation of the constituents from the government as a defence against killing civilians. I would rather argue that the specificity of the attack is proportional to the level of technology held by the attacker. To this day, I have heard few objections the the mass of civilian deaths as a result of the bombings of London and (worse) Berlin during WWII.
When someone thinks random killing is moraly justified it lets the rest of us know how fucked the world is.Acts of terrorism are hardly random. In fact if you delete the the word "random" from that last sentence, I think you would have got it right.
As an Australian (we're next I have no doubts), I have been distanced from the emotional side of having my country members blown to smithereens. By using the sliver of extra objectivity this allows, I can see that you could hardly expect anything different from the extremists. Look at this from the other side, if GWB, Blair and Little Johnny Howard want to wage war on terror, then they need to expect that terror will wage war back. This is all the GP post was stating - the extremists see the coalition as the aggressors and that they are acting in "self defence".
I had much trouble explaining this point of view during "911" and I fully expect this to be modded as a troll too but whereas the coalition says that "they started it" by blowing up the WTC, the extremist will point to the US foreign policy for years preceding the attack.
The age old adage applies, "If you can't stand the heat, get out of the kitchen" - something I have been maintaining that my government do all along. Hopefully they will listen before the attack hits here (I don't fancy being blown up in a train).
What's wrong with peace and co-operation anyway?
I suspect that many of these "fledgling outbreaks" that the AV companies most quickly defeat are the variants that have just been edited by script kiddies.
Tweak the engine a little and viola, they have defeated a virus in 10 minutes!
gas saturation is directly related to pressure.
Yes you are right but you are forgetting that gas saturation is a function of the pressure of the gas not the liquid.
The only significant supply of air to be dissolved in the sea is in the atmosphere, which is only at 1ATM pressure.
Rebreathers have essentially three parts.
1) The gas store/s. This is the bottles of gas used to top up the system as the oxygen levels become depleted. This gas can be air, pure oxygen, nitrox (basically air with a larger percentage of oxygen added to it), trimix (a specialised mixture of nitrogen, oxygen and helium) or heliox (oxygen/heium mixture).
2) The scrubber. This canister is scrubs out any carbon dioxide exhaled by the diver.
2) The airbag (sometime refered to as a lung). This stores the air being scrubbed in a bag at ambient pressure, which is all that is required to be able to physically breathe. As the diver descends, the air in the airbag compresses and gets topped up from the gas bottles. As the dive surfaces, the air expands and an over inflation valve releases the excess gas.
As always it is way more complicated than what I described, depending on whether you are talking closed circuit or semi-closed circuit kit - but that is the basics.
Oh yeah,
I think these also have trouble delivering at any significant pressure, thus the low-depth limitations.
Not quite - as I mentioned the gas in the air bladder is at ambient - what limits depth with semi-closed circuit rebreathers (which are far more prevalent) is that the oxygen content is usually much higher than normal air. Oxygen becomes significantly toxic at a partial pressure of 1.6 ATM, which occurs at ~ 66m (220ft) breathing air or just 6m (20ft) with pure oxygen.
I have scuba dived since 1982 and I am rarely limited by the amount of O2 I have handy.
Because I like decompression diving, air supply is still the number one limiting factor to my dives. I still don't think this will be useful.
That is why modern scuba uses pressure delivery systems... I don't see how the contraption can both be small and deliver at a high pressure while operating off of one battery. Even at ~32 feet you are at 1 atmosphere extra pressure.
I call bullshit! First, pressure delivery systems are a direct consequence of storing air under pressure na d the reason why that is done is the convenience of have all that air in an itsy bitsy bottle! Second, the contraption will automatically create air at ambient pressure (which is all you need to be able to breathe). Third, at 10m (~33 ft) you are at 2ATM pressure, not 1ATM!
The main reason this is useless is due to the following calculation... At the surface, 1 ATM, to fill one one shallow breath (~3 litres) you would need to process 5 / 0.015 = 200 litres of seawater. Take that down to 20m (66ft - 3 ATM) and that becomes 600 litres, because the gas compresses under the pressure of the water. Now consider that a relatively fit adult might have as many as 15 of these breaths a minute! - 9000 litres a minute of seawater!Do a relatively technical dive down to 50m (6ATM) and I reckon the guy using that kit would be picking his buddy out of the water inlet!
Additionally,
Pure O2 is poisonous below about 32feet, if I remember correctly and if you go below about 100feet, just depending you can get high. Go google, "rapture of the deep."
1) This system extracts AIR, not oxygen. 2) Oxygen has little to do with nitrogen narcosis, aka "rapture of the deep".
Log in to the machine as an administrator and turn on system auditing! Then use regedt32 to setup auditing on the HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE, logging only failures. It won't be long before you will be able to use the event viewer to see EXACTLY what registry keys the app is attempting to access.
The thing that gives me the shits is that people like you think that you have the skills to do my job and because the PHBs don't know any better, I get paid SFA for my time and knowledge!
And he's gonna find out the specific registry keys the application accesses how, exactly?
By RTFM!
After years searching, the slashdotter brings their first girlfriend home only to have her look at the ceiling over the bed and scream, "I'm leaving you PERVERT!"
"But it's my TV, honest..."
After years searching, the slashdotter brings their first girlfriend home only to have her scream, "I'm leaving you PERVERT!"
"But it's my TV, honest..."
They should have been mebiwumpus and gibiwumpus, respectively... Let's just hope I haven't started any speculation on Wumpuses vs Wumpi... :-)
Among the Gartner Group's key findings were that the ATO should develop an open-source policy and review procurement processes to better enable the evaluation, selection and sharing of open-source software.
It looks like someone at Gartner is going to get fired when big Billy finds out that theey have broken ranks!it's all in the wrist!
I'm an expert at screwing!
"We fart in your general direction."
that's EXACTLY why he's buying viagra!
befo I get jiggy wif yo bas ass!
Why on earth would you want to fuck my donkey?
then someone using your program isn't licensed to modify it.
But from the microsoft licence we have:
IANAL but this means to me that if the XML reader/writer was compiled as a library, all parts of your program except for the XML library could be under any licence you like!
Provided it complied with the MS specification, who would want to go around changing the file formatting code anyway?
When a Saint Bernard goes a Chihuahua bitch all you are left with is a wig.
So how come they are the same species?