1 is a 50% in a course, but you need 2.0 or higher to graduate. So you need an average of above 60%. GPA is based on letter grades, 4 being an A (>80%), 3 being a B (>70%), and so on.
I didn't buy any of my textbooks this semester (my ones from the previous semester, my first, remain in a pile on my desk where they were throughout), EXCEPT the one that if I didn't buy it, I would be chucked out of the class: The Oracle University kit.
See, since it's a certification class, Oracle forces all of the students to purchase totally new copies of these things. And what is it that is worth $CAN265 (plus tax) you may ask? The two volumes of Oracle9i: Intro to SQL, an "Additional Practices" booklet, and a frigging Notebook, which isn't a workbook or lab manual or anything like that... It's just a booklet with lines printed on the pages where you can write things. Absolutely useless. Oh, and admittedly it DID come with a nice Oracle highlighter / pen combo, which, being worth approximately $100, I'll try not to lose.
BTW, if you're wondering, the books are currently in a pile on my desk next to my books from last semester. I've currently got a 3.9 GPA.
Why would users want to pay more than three times as much for something with no actual increase in quality?
Hell, I was initially thinking that I could just copy these things with my DVDR before they turn black, but I can do that with rentals as well! There are some ideas I will never understand.
You're insane, make the a element semantically totally different from what browsers interpret it as now? It's one thing to be non-backward compatible but that would be thowing the baby out with the bathwater.
I am currently downloading this. The lack of documentation is a bit annoying, but hopefully it should compile well.
This is, as far as I can tell, a MUCH better idea than the MS Virtual PC image we were supposed to download from our school's server for use in our C++ course (which we are basing in Linux, we're banned from using.NET for it, which I think is pretty cool).
It'll also be my first time compiling the kernel (though a slightly older version), which should be interesting as well. I hope this project goes along well.:^)
So with this payment at risk system, you basically have to reject all unpaid emails as the receiver to be guaranteed not to receive spam (or much of it). What happens if, as the sender, you don't have a credit card? I used email a lot when I was younger.
That said, this system does seem to be pretty good.
Microsoft can't "remotely deactivate" any version of Windows XP any more than I can reach into your hard drive with my mind and delete your OS. And even if they could, any government with an ounce of programming experience would DISABLE Windows Product Activation through a crack, or even use the Corporate version, which doesn't ask you for it.
Are you trying to imply that all software created in the United States should only be distributed to countries that the US explicitly approves of or something? That's not the way the world works, and that's certainly not the way that I would want MY software handled if I lived in the US.
Microsoft would donate cash and the latest versions of its software, but the centers were free to expand with other software, including open source software such as Linux, Gates said.
"They'll be adding software from other providers. There's no exclusivity," he said. "Our role is to bring software that is quite popular, and happens to be ours."
Mod me down if you must, but I applaud Microsoft for this. While Linux or other open source OS use is definitely on the rise throughout the world, Windows is still the primary desktop of the business world, and this should indeed help people to enhance their skills and thus their marketability. You might say that they could potentially become "hooked" to Microsoft software, but again, there's no clause that limits them to using it, so I can only see this helping people. Bravo.
Can't these people at least do their homework first? There's so much wrong with this document that it's entirely ludicrous.
First off, we have the standard "some believe the GPL is in violation of the Constitution". W00t. Way to get as vague as possible and to point out that really only SCO (and perhaps Microsoft) believe this (oddly enough, to their benefit as a company).
Second, SCO's constant misrepresentation of the Free Software Foundation and the Open Source community in general is very disturbing.
The author of the GPL is well-known for his view that proprietary software (meaning software as an intellectual asset from which the designer can derive profit) is unacceptable.
[The GPL] "frees" the software that is proprietary, licensable, and a source of income from the companies that developed it.
In reality, again, GPL'd software can derive profit from support contracts, installations, and the like. But nowhere in the GPL does it say that you should link in or otherwise include proprietary code; that's not the goal, the goal is to create BETTER code that does the same thing, and also happens to be free. Yes, perhaps it can "free" a source of income from a company which developed a proprietary alternative, but THAT'S BUSINESS, Darl. There's nothing in the constitution that can get you out of the fact that we live in a capitalist society and if you can't find a way to compete, get out of the business.
And then, of course, we get to SCO's main point of business, or "proof" that Open Source software is evil; code has been stolen from them and imported into Linux without authorization. For the last time, everyone is asking, WHAT code, and WHERE is it? We will replace it! There's a whole community ready to fix any wrongdoings inside Linux in the blink of an eye. Oh, but wait, telling that would be "freeing" you of your litigation profit stream. I apologize.
Free or low-cost [ed. contradicted yourself there] Open Source software, full of proprietary code
And a second contradiction to round out that paragraph.
Why should a software company invest to develop exciting new capabilities when their software could end up "freed" as part of Linux under the GPL?
Because of a number of reasons. First and foremost, if they have the superior software, they will continue to own the market. You think Adobe and Photoshop are suffering a lot due to The GIMP? Secondly, because "freeing" software doesn't mean stealing it, even though you blatantly infer that. If any new software is put into Linux, it's either already been released free by its ORIGINAL developer, or it's code that volunteers have created, all their own. There are no bad-faith copyright violations in Linux because nobody knew about SCO's IP "rights" in the first place, and we still don't!
Our economy has been hurt by offshore outsourcing of technology jobs.
Hehe... coming from SCO... hehehe.
The rest of it is BS, mostly (national security?), so I'll leave it at that. Really though, SCO should present something a bit more substantial if they want us to think they're anything more than moneygrubbing lawyers.
I don't *just* use M$ Office, as stated in my original post. Hell, I'd be perfectly willing to try OpenOffice, but again, there are some Windows apps that have no equal or superior solution available on Linux as of yet, and that is why I need good Win32 support.
Already using Firebird and Thunderbird regularly (I replaced IE on my Quick Launch), and have tried Gimp. Saying something like "Linux is not Windows" is useless to me; everybody knows that. I want to be able to do the things I do now quicker and better. I think it's this sort of attitude that slows Linux's progression into the desktop world.
OK, I've been thinking about making "the big leap" to a Linux distro for a while, and this Windows application compatibility looks really intriguing. Can someone give me an idea of how well it works, and any configuration / compatibility snafus it might have?
The only things, at this point, that would really prevent me from wanting to use Linux as my primary OS would be the ability to run Windows apps well (let's face it, I have a lot of apps on my system that work well already, and I don't want to have to lose access to them or have to reboot into Windows to use them), and the ability to play games / DirectX-based programs (I've heard WineX has this ability, any comments on how good it is / how easy it is to use / configure?).
I've recently been experimenting with KDE under Cygwin, which works surprisingly well except for a few glitches like not displaying JPEGs correctly (I've heard they fixed this in the latest version). Any comparisons?
From the people that brought you (and are still bringing you) Kazaa Lite comes Supertrick, effectively a Hosts file used to redirect the servers that provide advertising to your loopback address. Also, if you're not already running a server, you can get eDexter to make any "blocked" into transparent GIFs that don't break the page. Should work pretty well for these background loading ads.:^)
"The new code is going to make many people ask why, if the mobile people can do it, the fixed internet people can't." - John Carr
Here we go again...
Cell phones are not the same thing as the Internet. The Internet was design such that if a node goes down, traffic will route around it. A similar thing would happen if censorship were to be pressed upon us at the ISP level (analogous to the cell phone service providers) as users would simply find ways around it with tunneling protocols, mirrors, and the like.
And I have a feeling that this "new code" will be exploited as well. Of course it's a good thing that the phone companies want to protect children, but there are many ways that censorship like this can aid them in having a monopoly over other providers of mobile phone chat services. We'll just have to see what happens.
1. A method for assigning URL's and e-mail addresses to members of a group comprising the steps of:
assigning each member of said group a URL of the form "name.subdomain.domain"; and
assigning each member of said group an e-mail address of the form "name@subdomain.domain;"
wherein the "name" portion of said URL and said e-mail address is the same and unique for each particular one of said members such that an only difference between said URL and said e-mail address for said member is that in said URL the "@" symbol of the e-mail address is replaced with a "." and wherein said "subdomain" portion of said URL and said e-mail address is the same for all members of said group.
2. The method of claim 1 wherein said members of said group comprise members of a licensed profession.
Now... I'm going to try to remain calm here but HOW THE FUCK WAS THIS PATENTED?! Nothing is *invented* here, it's a method of organizing a system which ALREADY EXISTS (email and DNS). This just further shows the US Patent Office's stupidity.
Then it's time for a paradigm shift, since I've obviously been misunderstanding.
Admittedly, NAT can stop inbound connections from reaching a computer that otherwise would receive all connections had it not been behind a NAT router. But my computer is no longer a peer on the internet; my NETWORK is now a peer on the internet, with ports opened and forwarded to multiple machines as I see fit. In one way of thinking, it allows me to use the computers in my home more as I would had I been running a corporate perimeter network, with different machines running web servers, FTP servers, and the like.
Admittedly, Joe Sixpack has no idea why his computer won't allow inbound connections anymore after he's put a router on his network, but here's the thing: Joe Sixpack has no idea what an inbound connection is, nor, likely, does he even know SpeakFreely even exists. If Joe Sixpack doesn't want the feds snooping on his conversations, he'll find a way to forward his ports, like all decent home-level routers allow. If John Walker wanted to combat this NAT-related inability to use his software, why didn't he just post some documentation or links showing how users can forward the correct ports? The moment Joe Sixpack wants to use SpeakFreely, he could go to the site and see "hey, I have a Linksys router, and this link that says 'IF YOU HAVE A ROUTER CLICK HERE' shows me how to get around it!"
IMHO this whole end of life thing seems a bit much if it's based entirely around home-level routers, as this issue is largely avoidable.
Slashdot Mirror
The information is collected by states and forwarded to a database in Florida, where a private company, Seisint Inc., builds and manages the database.
So what's to prevent this company from selling the information to the highest bidder? Glad I don't live in Utah...
1 is a 50% in a course, but you need 2.0 or higher to graduate. So you need an average of above 60%. GPA is based on letter grades, 4 being an A (>80%), 3 being a B (>70%), and so on.
And at nearly all other universities, GPA is measured from 0 to 4 with 2 as a minimum pass mark. ;^)
I didn't buy any of my textbooks this semester (my ones from the previous semester, my first, remain in a pile on my desk where they were throughout), EXCEPT the one that if I didn't buy it, I would be chucked out of the class: The Oracle University kit.
See, since it's a certification class, Oracle forces all of the students to purchase totally new copies of these things. And what is it that is worth $CAN265 (plus tax) you may ask? The two volumes of Oracle9i: Intro to SQL, an "Additional Practices" booklet, and a frigging Notebook, which isn't a workbook or lab manual or anything like that... It's just a booklet with lines printed on the pages where you can write things. Absolutely useless. Oh, and admittedly it DID come with a nice Oracle highlighter / pen combo, which, being worth approximately $100, I'll try not to lose.
BTW, if you're wondering, the books are currently in a pile on my desk next to my books from last semester. I've currently got a 3.9 GPA.
Why would users want to pay more than three times as much for something with no actual increase in quality?
Hell, I was initially thinking that I could just copy these things with my DVDR before they turn black, but I can do that with rentals as well! There are some ideas I will never understand.
You're insane, make the a element semantically totally different from what browsers interpret it as now? It's one thing to be non-backward compatible but that would be thowing the baby out with the bathwater.
I'll just link to my previous comment ;^)
I am currently downloading this. The lack of documentation is a bit annoying, but hopefully it should compile well.
.NET for it, which I think is pretty cool).
:^)
This is, as far as I can tell, a MUCH better idea than the MS Virtual PC image we were supposed to download from our school's server for use in our C++ course (which we are basing in Linux, we're banned from using
It'll also be my first time compiling the kernel (though a slightly older version), which should be interesting as well. I hope this project goes along well.
So with this payment at risk system, you basically have to reject all unpaid emails as the receiver to be guaranteed not to receive spam (or much of it). What happens if, as the sender, you don't have a credit card? I used email a lot when I was younger.
That said, this system does seem to be pretty good.
This isn't a "shot" at the RIAA. Apple knows perfectly well that they're supporting the RIAA just as much as CD makers are. This is false advertising.
Well, duh. I doubt Eric Raymond would post that ;^)
Are you on crack?
Microsoft can't "remotely deactivate" any version of Windows XP any more than I can reach into your hard drive with my mind and delete your OS. And even if they could, any government with an ounce of programming experience would DISABLE Windows Product Activation through a crack, or even use the Corporate version, which doesn't ask you for it.
Are you trying to imply that all software created in the United States should only be distributed to countries that the US explicitly approves of or something? That's not the way the world works, and that's certainly not the way that I would want MY software handled if I lived in the US.
Microsoft would donate cash and the latest versions of its software, but the centers were free to expand with other software, including open source software such as Linux, Gates said.
"They'll be adding software from other providers. There's no exclusivity," he said. "Our role is to bring software that is quite popular, and happens to be ours."
Mod me down if you must, but I applaud Microsoft for this. While Linux or other open source OS use is definitely on the rise throughout the world, Windows is still the primary desktop of the business world, and this should indeed help people to enhance their skills and thus their marketability. You might say that they could potentially become "hooked" to Microsoft software, but again, there's no clause that limits them to using it, so I can only see this helping people. Bravo.
First off, we have the standard "some believe the GPL is in violation of the Constitution". W00t. Way to get as vague as possible and to point out that really only SCO (and perhaps Microsoft) believe this (oddly enough, to their benefit as a company).
Second, SCO's constant misrepresentation of the Free Software Foundation and the Open Source community in general is very disturbing.
Funny that the FSF itself defines proprietary as software whose use, redistribution, or modification is restricted or prohibited. I believe what Darl was trying to refer to was commercial software, which can easily derive profit and still be free. Damn, shot yourself in the foot there, eh Darl?
In reality, again, GPL'd software can derive profit from support contracts, installations, and the like. But nowhere in the GPL does it say that you should link in or otherwise include proprietary code; that's not the goal, the goal is to create BETTER code that does the same thing, and also happens to be free. Yes, perhaps it can "free" a source of income from a company which developed a proprietary alternative, but THAT'S BUSINESS, Darl. There's nothing in the constitution that can get you out of the fact that we live in a capitalist society and if you can't find a way to compete, get out of the business.
And then, of course, we get to SCO's main point of business, or "proof" that Open Source software is evil; code has been stolen from them and imported into Linux without authorization. For the last time, everyone is asking, WHAT code, and WHERE is it? We will replace it! There's a whole community ready to fix any wrongdoings inside Linux in the blink of an eye. Oh, but wait, telling that would be "freeing" you of your litigation profit stream. I apologize.
Free or low-cost [ed. contradicted yourself there] Open Source software, full of proprietary code
And a second contradiction to round out that paragraph.
Because of a number of reasons. First and foremost, if they have the superior software, they will continue to own the market. You think Adobe and Photoshop are suffering a lot due to The GIMP? Secondly, because "freeing" software doesn't mean stealing it, even though you blatantly infer that. If any new software is put into Linux, it's either already been released free by its ORIGINAL developer, or it's code that volunteers have created, all their own. There are no bad-faith copyright violations in Linux because nobody knew about SCO's IP "rights" in the first place, and we still don't!
Hehe... coming from SCO... hehehe.
The rest of it is BS, mostly (national security?), so I'll leave it at that. Really though, SCO should present something a bit more substantial if they want us to think they're anything more than moneygrubbing lawyers.
I don't *just* use M$ Office, as stated in my original post. Hell, I'd be perfectly willing to try OpenOffice, but again, there are some Windows apps that have no equal or superior solution available on Linux as of yet, and that is why I need good Win32 support.
Already using Firebird and Thunderbird regularly (I replaced IE on my Quick Launch), and have tried Gimp. Saying something like "Linux is not Windows" is useless to me; everybody knows that. I want to be able to do the things I do now quicker and better. I think it's this sort of attitude that slows Linux's progression into the desktop world.
OK, I've been thinking about making "the big leap" to a Linux distro for a while, and this Windows application compatibility looks really intriguing. Can someone give me an idea of how well it works, and any configuration / compatibility snafus it might have?
The only things, at this point, that would really prevent me from wanting to use Linux as my primary OS would be the ability to run Windows apps well (let's face it, I have a lot of apps on my system that work well already, and I don't want to have to lose access to them or have to reboot into Windows to use them), and the ability to play games / DirectX-based programs (I've heard WineX has this ability, any comments on how good it is / how easy it is to use / configure?).
I've recently been experimenting with KDE under Cygwin, which works surprisingly well except for a few glitches like not displaying JPEGs correctly (I've heard they fixed this in the latest version). Any comparisons?
From the people that brought you (and are still bringing you) Kazaa Lite comes Supertrick, effectively a Hosts file used to redirect the servers that provide advertising to your loopback address. Also, if you're not already running a server, you can get eDexter to make any "blocked" into transparent GIFs that don't break the page. Should work pretty well for these background loading ads. :^)
"The new code is going to make many people ask why, if the mobile people can do it, the fixed internet people can't." - John Carr
Here we go again...
Cell phones are not the same thing as the Internet. The Internet was design such that if a node goes down, traffic will route around it. A similar thing would happen if censorship were to be pressed upon us at the ISP level (analogous to the cell phone service providers) as users would simply find ways around it with tunneling protocols, mirrors, and the like.
And I have a feeling that this "new code" will be exploited as well. Of course it's a good thing that the phone companies want to protect children, but there are many ways that censorship like this can aid them in having a monopoly over other providers of mobile phone chat services. We'll just have to see what happens.
Screw being cool, I just want to be able to break into the government through cool 3D sequences!
Oh, I live in Canada, I just think it's funny ;^)
What is claimed is:
1. A method for assigning URL's and e-mail addresses to members of a group comprising the steps of:
assigning each member of said group a URL of the form "name.subdomain.domain"; and
assigning each member of said group an e-mail address of the form "name@subdomain.domain;"
wherein the "name" portion of said URL and said e-mail address is the same and unique for each particular one of said members such that an only difference between said URL and said e-mail address for said member is that in said URL the "@" symbol of the e-mail address is replaced with a "." and wherein said "subdomain" portion of said URL and said e-mail address is the same for all members of said group.
2. The method of claim 1 wherein said members of said group comprise members of a licensed profession.
Now... I'm going to try to remain calm here but HOW THE FUCK WAS THIS PATENTED?! Nothing is *invented* here, it's a method of organizing a system which ALREADY EXISTS (email and DNS). This just further shows the US Patent Office's stupidity.
Looks like it to me ;^)
Then it's time for a paradigm shift, since I've obviously been misunderstanding.
Admittedly, NAT can stop inbound connections from reaching a computer that otherwise would receive all connections had it not been behind a NAT router. But my computer is no longer a peer on the internet; my NETWORK is now a peer on the internet, with ports opened and forwarded to multiple machines as I see fit. In one way of thinking, it allows me to use the computers in my home more as I would had I been running a corporate perimeter network, with different machines running web servers, FTP servers, and the like.
Admittedly, Joe Sixpack has no idea why his computer won't allow inbound connections anymore after he's put a router on his network, but here's the thing: Joe Sixpack has no idea what an inbound connection is, nor, likely, does he even know SpeakFreely even exists. If Joe Sixpack doesn't want the feds snooping on his conversations, he'll find a way to forward his ports, like all decent home-level routers allow. If John Walker wanted to combat this NAT-related inability to use his software, why didn't he just post some documentation or links showing how users can forward the correct ports? The moment Joe Sixpack wants to use SpeakFreely, he could go to the site and see "hey, I have a Linksys router, and this link that says 'IF YOU HAVE A ROUTER CLICK HERE' shows me how to get around it!"
IMHO this whole end of life thing seems a bit much if it's based entirely around home-level routers, as this issue is largely avoidable.
And yeah, I use Windows for the most part, the Unix version is here.