Am I missing something obvious here? A simple copy/paste will bypass this seemingly pointless feature.
Well, since the chat logs are stored on Google's servers, I imagine that it would be awfully hard to "paste" your OTR text into said chat log.
Sure, somebody can make a local copy of the chat log with the OTR text pasted into it, but if you were to compare it to the version stored on Google's servers, you'd see that the local copy was a "fake" -- as in, "I never said that".
What does it say about the US Patent office and software patents that these patents have made it through trials, appeals, etc and only now has the Patent Office decided they weren't any good in the first place?
It says nothing about software patents in general, only something about these particular patents.
It suggests that, despite some rather glaring inefficiencies, that there is some hope that patents can be overturned when shown to be invalid.
I don't disagree with the sentiment; I simply feel that the paragraph did not convey the same message that the poster's "summary" did. I have since been told that "above" referred to the link, and not to the selection given. An odd way to present an argument, but the full text of the letter certainly has more substance to it.
I believe that all depends on the license itself. Some patent-holders are more than happy to have further research done on the genes -- hey, someone else does the work for them. On the other hand, I believe I heard some cases a year or so ago where the "detecting of the gene" had to be licensed, preventing anyone from researching without first paying up.
What are these guys talking about? If you want something that's patented, you go and buy it at the store. How does that interfere with research? I don't get it. What am I missing?
Consider the fact that certain individual genes are patented. Now consider that, to do research involving these genes, you need to purchase a "license" first. These licenses can be extremely expensive.
I think that this is what the legistaltion is aiming at, rather than, say, you average electronic widget.
So much for the "Freedom to use the code the way you want."
The GPL has never been about "freedom to use the code the way you want" -- that's what public domain, or the modified (i.e. no forced attribution) BSD licenses are for. Otherwise, you'd be free to take GPL code, change it around, and release it as a proprietary product without releasing your source code -- "the way you want."
The GPL has always been about "freedom to view, change and distribute the code the way you want, provided that any changes that are made, are made available to the public." It's about user freedom, not distributor freedom.
what next charging someone for receiving a phone call
You mean like the (North American) cell phone networks?
Re:Dispatch AJAX and Warlock...
on
Web 3.0
·
· Score: 1
Javascript generating fragments of HTML to build a user interface in particular feels like a very blunt instrument...
Ideally, I think, you'd use a language like PHP or RoR to generate the bulk of the XML, and JavaScript to parse the input/output. More like client-side processing than anything, so that web pages appear "faster" than if they had to send every little change to the server.
Of course, I have yet to try and program an AJAX application.
Even a simple interface has performance reminiscent of Windows 3.1 on a 386...
Maybe it's just some wonky implementation that's limiting your performance. Google Mail uses AJAX (IIRC), and it's generally quite snappy.
However, since you can disable it, I'm not too worried.
Agreed, although some might argue that this feature should be off by default. I've never used iTunes myself, so I have no real background with this at all.
Amazon.com is a malicious website! When I click on a book, they show me other books that people have purchased with it!
While the term "malicious" should probably not have been applied to either iTunes or Amazon, what you say is correct: Amazon.com monitors your clicks and purchases, and profiles it against its database to suggest other books you might want to purchase.
The difference, of course, is that while you are clicking on Amazon.com, you are essentially playing about on their server. When you are casually listening to MP3s via iTunes, your personal data is being collected and sent from your own computer.
LaTeX uses special ligatures for certain letter combinations, including "fi". If the text was selected-then-cut-then-paste from the generated PDF, then it's likely the ligatures would not be present in the font on/.
Maverick patches are the last thing we need. And now, since this guy is getting a bunch of press, we will have 90 million hackers trying to be the first to release a patch for the next MS bug.
So who's the one at fault: the maverick hacker who writes a patch, or the user who chooses to install it instead of waiting for the official patch from Redmond?
You do know that Ilfak's patch was optional, right?
"CIS acknowledged that it is unlikely to see any of the judgement money but said that it was time that spammers learnt that their actions would result in an economic death penalty."
Apparently, the new virus scanners can parse the files. In several instances, packed EXEs have set off erroneous red flags as viruses themselves. McAffee used to trip over certain files, though it has since been fixed.
While not *that* common, I have noticed that a number of projects pack their files since the speed-penalty is rather negligible, and the download/storage savings is a benefit.
I haven't yet downloaded POO.o yet, and I haven't used any of these "portable apps" either, but are they just regular Windows binaries? Can they be UPXed if not already?
Firefox, for instance, shrinks down from 7MB to a nice 1.5MB on my horribly space-limited computer here at work.
There won't be a truly Grandma-ready Linux (or *BSD) distribution until the public demands it.
Are you sure it's not here already?
My grandma needs a point-and-click desktop, a word processor and spreadsheet, a CD player, a web browser, an email client, print-capability, and some cheap solitaire games. Is there any reason why a modern distro like SuSE, pre-loaded with KDE, OpenOffice.org, KsCD, Konqeror/Firefox, KMail, CUPS and KDEgames, does not fit the bill?
Or is this another instance of "but Linux will not run my favourite game without launching WINE" post?
Slashdot Mirror
kids aren't programmed by their teachers. they are introduced to topics by their teachers and they arrive at their own conclusions.
Clearly, you have never had the pleasure of teaching a high school mathematics class.
Since when can you patent guaranteeing delivery of a message?
Well, RIM had sent the Patent Office a message complaining about the "obviousness" of the patent, but somehow they never received it...
Yes, just like "hacking" and all the other words people have taken over to mean something different.
For all intensive purposes, I could care less.
Am I missing something obvious here? A simple copy/paste will bypass this seemingly pointless feature.
Well, since the chat logs are stored on Google's servers, I imagine that it would be awfully hard to "paste" your OTR text into said chat log.
Sure, somebody can make a local copy of the chat log with the OTR text pasted into it, but if you were to compare it to the version stored on Google's servers, you'd see that the local copy was a "fake" -- as in, "I never said that".
Or so I see it...
What does it say about the US Patent office and software patents that these patents have made it through trials, appeals, etc and only now has the Patent Office decided they weren't any good in the first place?
So I think the comparison is an apt one.
I don't disagree with the sentiment; I simply feel that the paragraph did not convey the same message that the poster's "summary" did. I have since been told that "above" referred to the link, and not to the selection given. An odd way to present an argument, but the full text of the letter certainly has more substance to it.
'll paraphrase the above for you in fewer words.
Interesting. I don't see one instance of Billy G mentioning:
What I do see is a screed claiming that:
So how is that paraphrasing again?
Come on. I'm not fan of Billy G, but you can't honestly claim that the paragraph above says what you say it does.
Of course, some of us have heard that this "large number of words for snow" story is somewhat misleading.
I believe that all depends on the license itself. Some patent-holders are more than happy to have further research done on the genes -- hey, someone else does the work for them. On the other hand, I believe I heard some cases a year or so ago where the "detecting of the gene" had to be licensed, preventing anyone from researching without first paying up.
What are these guys talking about? If you want something that's patented, you go and buy it at the store. How does that interfere with research? I don't get it. What am I missing?
Consider the fact that certain individual genes are patented. Now consider that, to do research involving these genes, you need to purchase a "license" first. These licenses can be extremely expensive.
I think that this is what the legistaltion is aiming at, rather than, say, you average electronic widget.
Technically, any creative work is copyrighted. If I write some code, is it illegal for me to put it into a shared folder?
I imagine that if you are the copyright holder (i.e. author) then you are free to distribute your code as you wish.
On the other hand, if you lift code from one of those "Learn to Program" texts and stick it in a shared folder, then you might be in trouble.
This is a bizarre criminalization of mundane, innocent, and customary activities, solely intended to create a climate of fear.
Indeed it is.
So much for the "Freedom to use the code the way you want."
The GPL has never been about "freedom to use the code the way you want" -- that's what public domain, or the modified (i.e. no forced attribution) BSD licenses are for. Otherwise, you'd be free to take GPL code, change it around, and release it as a proprietary product without releasing your source code -- "the way you want."
The GPL has always been about "freedom to view, change and distribute the code the way you want, provided that any changes that are made, are made available to the public." It's about user freedom, not distributor freedom.
There are two capitals in West Virginia: "W" and "V".
what next charging someone for receiving a phone call
You mean like the (North American) cell phone networks?
Javascript generating fragments of HTML to build a user interface in particular feels like a very blunt instrument...
Ideally, I think, you'd use a language like PHP or RoR to generate the bulk of the XML, and JavaScript to parse the input/output. More like client-side processing than anything, so that web pages appear "faster" than if they had to send every little change to the server.
Of course, I have yet to try and program an AJAX application.
Even a simple interface has performance reminiscent of Windows 3.1 on a 386...
Maybe it's just some wonky implementation that's limiting your performance. Google Mail uses AJAX (IIRC), and it's generally quite snappy.
However, since you can disable it, I'm not too worried.
Agreed, although some might argue that this feature should be off by default. I've never used iTunes myself, so I have no real background with this at all.
(rolls) ... and does +50HP critical damage to the bear.
Amazon.com is a malicious website! When I click on a book, they show me other books that people have purchased with it!
While the term "malicious" should probably not have been applied to either iTunes or Amazon, what you say is correct: Amazon.com monitors your clicks and purchases, and profiles it against its database to suggest other books you might want to purchase.
The difference, of course, is that while you are clicking on Amazon.com, you are essentially playing about on their server. When you are casually listening to MP3s via iTunes, your personal data is being collected and sent from your own computer.
LaTeX uses special ligatures for certain letter combinations, including "fi". If the text was selected-then-cut-then-paste from the generated PDF, then it's likely the ligatures would not be present in the font on /.
Just one possible explanation.
Maverick patches are the last thing we need. And now, since this guy is getting a bunch of press, we will have 90 million hackers trying to be the first to release a patch for the next MS bug.
So who's the one at fault: the maverick hacker who writes a patch, or the user who chooses to install it instead of waiting for the official patch from Redmond?
You do know that Ilfak's patch was optional, right?
"CIS acknowledged that it is unlikely to see any of the judgement money but said that it was time that spammers learnt that their actions would result in an economic death penalty."
Apparently, the new virus scanners can parse the files. In several instances, packed EXEs have set off erroneous red flags as viruses themselves. McAffee used to trip over certain files, though it has since been fixed.
While not *that* common, I have noticed that a number of projects pack their files since the speed-penalty is rather negligible, and the download/storage savings is a benefit.
Ahhh, well, there goes that idea. Thanks.
I haven't yet downloaded POO.o yet, and I haven't used any of these "portable apps" either, but are they just regular Windows binaries? Can they be UPXed if not already?
Firefox, for instance, shrinks down from 7MB to a nice 1.5MB on my horribly space-limited computer here at work.
There won't be a truly Grandma-ready Linux (or *BSD) distribution until the public demands it.
Are you sure it's not here already?
My grandma needs a point-and-click desktop, a word processor and spreadsheet, a CD player, a web browser, an email client, print-capability, and some cheap solitaire games. Is there any reason why a modern distro like SuSE, pre-loaded with KDE, OpenOffice.org, KsCD, Konqeror/Firefox, KMail, CUPS and KDEgames, does not fit the bill?
Or is this another instance of "but Linux will not run my favourite game without launching WINE" post?