Buy a printer to do it, they exist, they're expensive.They can use ink designed to print on your surface.
Buy a plotter. Glue Paper to surface, laminate or paint it if required.
Attach your printer beast to a CNC rail system. They make home use ones, it might give the rigidity, speed and location control you want.
1 Will work, and can be adjusted, it is very expensive. 2 Standard inks are designed for paper, they are okay for special transparencies. General surfaces they suck. 3 This is a hack, getting proper alignment will be difficult and expensive. Better to use a real solution.
The judge found (page 10) that the FTC/FCC did not have "an unambiguous grant of authority to do so".
The agencies can not make rules outside their mandate without Congress stating so. One would have to review the legislation to determine if the grant of authority was sufficiently clear.
I think that anti spam people should simply broadcast the blacklist information through some distributed system. Filesharing, IM service, IRC (no DDOS there!), Usenet or such. Then it is up to the individual clients on whether to add or remove the "spam" depending who signed it.
I think usenet, perhaps with multiple moderators could work. Add a good web of trust, and it might work.
In many ways these people's rights are now forfeit.
Bullshit. These people are foreign citizens;
Sorry human rights and the right to fair treatment below to EVERYBODY, regardless of citizenship. We have accepted standards of treatment for people we are actively at war with. People who have no apparent hostile intent should get treated at least as well.
When someone patents something, nobody else is permitted to use that technology. You can't create a different product that acts in a similar way.
Imagine if someone patented the Internal combustion engine, or a word processor, or web based discussion sites. Then nobody could do this other then them. You couldn't recreate it, you couldn't improve on it.
The next problem is patents are expensive, and difficult to fight. If a company accuses you of infringing you're basically screwed. With Free ($0) software you don't even have money to defend yourself.
Sounds like a good idea, people will buy only from US sources. But then the US supply is limited (which is why there is a huge trade deficit), so the US suppliers jack up their price. The consumer has to either pay the inflated US price, or buy the imported goods with the tarrif. The end consumer ends up paying more for the same goods, and the market loses competition.
This is a basic econ topic, along with why minimum wage kills jobs and such.
I think if an alien came from an advanced planet and looked at us today it would think, "look at those idiots working most of their lives when they've already most of the tools to live a life of luxury!"
I think they'd be asking why most of the world doesn't have enough clean drinking water, while parts just dump it on the ground around their house.
We currently do NOT have all the stuff we need for everyone to live a life of luxury, there just isn't enough of it.
The current system does work, it works very well. But it isn't a riches for everyone system.
I am Canadian, born, educated and working. I was in engineering co-op at UW, worked with many foreign trained people. I am now working on international development teams.
My view. (yes I know I can't spell) Different focus in different countries. Thinking and approach is VERY different in some. There are some very excellent foreigners. There are some terrible foreigners. Typically I'd guess that the abilities are about the same, compared to some I think Canadian trained is a bit higher on theory, others a bit more on practicality.
You have to allow for adjustment time to North American standards, we're just different here.
By providing Open Source software without a warranty, these largest vendors avoid significant costs while increasing their services revenue
And SCO is still releasing GPL code, they plan on releasing samba and a stack of other Free/OSS software in their new products, and guess what no warranty.
I think that some sort of patent/license violation MS attack against Samba could prove much more damaging then some silly GPL isn't valid approach SCO is trying.
I think when you submit a work to someone, for the purposed of incorporating it into their work you are implying that you have a right or permission to do so.
Depending on how sympathetic the courts are they could get off pretty easy. They paid for software that (may) advertise listening to music on the internet. This sounds like a pretty reasonable and fair defense.
You didn't read the book did you? About the only thing in common between the two was that they were at war in the future. Most of the best parts were ripped out.
Funny, I rarely found the science part of science fiction interesting.
I find the ideas that the author has are the intriguing people.
Heinlein in "The moon is a Harsh Mistress" exposed me to many ideas I've never thought of before. It also provides a stark contrast to Lord of the Flies and the nature of man. The Forever war was a blast, what is this world coming to? Enders game, interesting solutions, and some of the hows. Starship troopers had some interesting political ideas. Lifeline was yet another interesting expression of a though, and reflection on change.
FWIW Tolkein is just as much about politics and psychology and history of the day as much as any good sci-fi story.
Isn't this known information? I know it isn't common knowledge, but we've played with it.
I'm not sure how low of a sound frequency they're dealing with, but we "found" that the annoying guy at school didn't like us playing very low frequency sounds through our stero into his room. You couldn't hear it, he didn't know about it, but he got very uncomfortable.
So we'll have cold fusion. It's more convenient than hot fusion.
Doesn't solve a few problems. #1 is it safe? #2 will it pollute? Radiation is the 'obvious' one, but what about spent fuel? is it poisonous? #3 where will we get the fuel for this? It won't run on nothing.
Why not focus on using less energy, and improving the efficiency of current sources. Solar cells have a LONG way to go both in efficiency and financial competativeness.
So what he did something. I've fought with lightsabers when I was 10 years younger, and 10 years older.
Okay not lightsabers, but thin PVC pipe we'd break on each other, and it bruised like a bitch.
This really isn't a big deal, he shouldn't let it bother him. And if he does, no amount of pity from the world will make it better, it will just emphasize it.
Wouldn't a database be a collection? Even if the individual work is not copyrighted, the collection can be. Copyright law covers this, more laws are not required.
Obviously what matters to the government is they can start with an existing product, Linux or a BSD are free for them to start with. They get their cost benefit from that. If they choose a system that they can release as OSS for others good.
I don't see anyone talking about the government forcing you to use a particular operating system. The closest I've heard of is having to us MS office file formats to submit bids for government contracts.
The governments will not be spending trillions of dollars. They should not even spend more then the current value of the licensing fees they expect to save. This probaly puts their development budget for this project below what MS would be spending on development.
If they can build a linux distribution that matches or beats the comperable MS system, for less money then they would have to pay, they should do this. This is competition, it's just proper allocation of resources.
Outsourcing the development to private companies will probaly be how this gets done anyway.
Should governments (ANY government) directly fund the development of an OS
Maybe, is it a better use of public money to improve on a free system, or to pay license fees for a commercial system.
This goes for every thing a governement does. If it is cheaper to buy software they should. If it is cheaper to improve the quality of free software to the point it is competative they should.
If a company or group of individuals can create a decent OS. (Be was never _that_ big) then surely a government has the resources to do this.
Slashdot Mirror
Buy a printer to do it, they exist, they're expensive.They can use ink designed to print on your surface.
Buy a plotter. Glue Paper to surface, laminate or paint it if required.
Attach your printer beast to a CNC rail system. They make home use ones, it might give the rigidity, speed and location control you want.
1 Will work, and can be adjusted, it is very expensive.
2 Standard inks are designed for paper, they are okay for special transparencies. General surfaces they suck.
3 This is a hack, getting proper alignment will be difficult and expensive. Better to use a real solution.
What do you think flooding is?
What do you think sarcasm is?
That doesn't make them right.
The judge found (page 10) that the FTC/FCC did not have "an unambiguous grant of authority to do so".
The agencies can not make rules outside their mandate without Congress stating so.
One would have to review the legislation to determine if the grant of authority was sufficiently clear.
I think that anti spam people should simply broadcast the blacklist information through some distributed system.
Filesharing, IM service, IRC (no DDOS there!), Usenet or such.
Then it is up to the individual clients on whether to add or remove the "spam" depending who signed it.
I think usenet, perhaps with multiple moderators could work.
Add a good web of trust, and it might work.
In many ways these people's rights are now forfeit.
Bullshit. These people are foreign citizens;
Sorry human rights and the right to fair treatment below to EVERYBODY, regardless of citizenship.
We have accepted standards of treatment for people we are actively at war with. People who have no apparent hostile intent should get treated at least as well.
When someone patents something, nobody else is permitted to use that technology.
You can't create a different product that acts in a similar way.
Imagine if someone patented the Internal combustion engine, or a word processor, or web based discussion sites.
Then nobody could do this other then them. You couldn't recreate it, you couldn't improve on it.
The next problem is patents are expensive, and difficult to fight. If a company accuses you of infringing you're basically screwed. With Free ($0) software you don't even have money to defend yourself.
Who says you have to make a living on minimum wage?
Students or people who just want some extra cash could do it. Casual employement.
Isn't a bad job better then unemployment?
Unemployment benefits could kick in if you work a "substandard" job. Save tax dollars, and the economy is more productive.
Also nobody said that we have a fair economic system.
The thing you are missing is that these "slave labour" rates ARE a step up in some areas.
Tarrifs will force them to squeeze out even more to remain competative.
I think much work has to be done, free trade alone is not the answer. I was just trying to point out that tarriffs aren't a solution to the problem.
Sounds like a good idea, people will buy only from US sources.
But then the US supply is limited (which is why there is a huge trade deficit), so the US suppliers jack up their price.
The consumer has to either pay the inflated US price, or buy the imported goods with the tarrif.
The end consumer ends up paying more for the same goods, and the market loses competition.
This is a basic econ topic, along with why minimum wage kills jobs and such.
I think if an alien came from an advanced planet and looked at us today it would think, "look at those idiots working most of their lives when they've already most of the tools to live a life of luxury!"
I think they'd be asking why most of the world doesn't have enough clean drinking water, while parts just dump it on the ground around their house.
We currently do NOT have all the stuff we need for everyone to live a life of luxury, there just isn't enough of it.
The current system does work, it works very well. But it isn't a riches for everyone system.
I am Canadian, born, educated and working.
I was in engineering co-op at UW, worked with many foreign trained people.
I am now working on international development teams.
My view. (yes I know I can't spell)
Different focus in different countries. Thinking and approach is VERY different in some.
There are some very excellent foreigners. There are some terrible foreigners.
Typically I'd guess that the abilities are about the same, compared to some I think Canadian trained is a bit higher on theory, others a bit more on practicality.
You have to allow for adjustment time to North American standards, we're just different here.
By providing Open Source software without a warranty, these largest vendors avoid significant costs while increasing their services revenue
And SCO is still releasing GPL code, they plan on releasing samba and a stack of other Free/OSS software in their new products, and guess what no warranty.
I think that some sort of patent/license violation MS attack against Samba could prove much more damaging then some silly GPL isn't valid approach SCO is trying.
I think when you submit a work to someone, for the purposed of incorporating it into their work you are implying that you have a right or permission to do so.
They claim they were paying to access the music.
Depending on how sympathetic the courts are they could get off pretty easy. They paid for software that (may) advertise listening to music on the internet.
This sounds like a pretty reasonable and fair defense.
What if iTunes users suddenly get sued?
Does SCO check to ensure the code their programmers submit is legal? Or do they just accept that it is?
You didn't read the book did you?
About the only thing in common between the two was that they were at war in the future.
Most of the best parts were ripped out.
Funny, I rarely found the science part of science fiction interesting.
I find the ideas that the author has are the intriguing people.
Heinlein in "The moon is a Harsh Mistress" exposed me to many ideas I've never thought of before. It also provides a stark contrast to Lord of the Flies and the nature of man.
The Forever war was a blast, what is this world coming to?
Enders game, interesting solutions, and some of the hows. Starship troopers had some interesting political ideas.
Lifeline was yet another interesting expression of a though, and reflection on change.
FWIW Tolkein is just as much about politics and psychology and history of the day as much as any good sci-fi story.
Isn't this known information?
I know it isn't common knowledge, but we've played with it.
I'm not sure how low of a sound frequency they're dealing with, but we "found" that the annoying guy at school didn't like us playing very low frequency sounds through our stero into his room.
You couldn't hear it, he didn't know about it, but he got very uncomfortable.
So we'll have cold fusion. It's more convenient than hot fusion.
Doesn't solve a few problems.
#1 is it safe?
#2 will it pollute? Radiation is the 'obvious' one, but what about spent fuel? is it poisonous?
#3 where will we get the fuel for this? It won't run on nothing.
Why not focus on using less energy, and improving the efficiency of current sources. Solar cells have a LONG way to go both in efficiency and financial competativeness.
So what he did something.
I've fought with lightsabers when I was 10 years younger, and 10 years older.
Okay not lightsabers, but thin PVC pipe we'd break on each other, and it bruised like a bitch.
This really isn't a big deal, he shouldn't let it bother him. And if he does, no amount of pity from the world will make it better, it will just emphasize it.
Yes, he did something illegal.
He did something wrong.
He might be able to prove or suggest no criminal intent, which would give the lenient sentence.
But really why was he doing this? it was dumb.
Wouldn't a database be a collection?
Even if the individual work is not copyrighted, the collection can be.
Copyright law covers this, more laws are not required.
Obviously what matters to the government is they can start with an existing product, Linux or a BSD are free for them to start with.
They get their cost benefit from that. If they choose a system that they can release as OSS for others good.
I don't see anyone talking about the government forcing you to use a particular operating system. The closest I've heard of is having to us MS office file formats to submit bids for government contracts.
The governments will not be spending trillions of dollars.
They should not even spend more then the current value of the licensing fees they expect to save. This probaly puts their development budget for this project below what MS would be spending on development.
If they can build a linux distribution that matches or beats the comperable MS system, for less money then they would have to pay, they should do this.
This is competition, it's just proper allocation of resources.
Outsourcing the development to private companies will probaly be how this gets done anyway.
Should governments (ANY government) directly fund the development of an OS
Maybe, is it a better use of public money to improve on a free system, or to pay license fees for a commercial system.
This goes for every thing a governement does. If it is cheaper to buy software they should. If it is cheaper to improve the quality of free software to the point it is competative they should.
If a company or group of individuals can create a decent OS. (Be was never _that_ big) then surely a government has the resources to do this.