I hope you mean only releasing the source code for those who would like to see it, and not that you want the code developed according to the usual open source models.
Developing a system to control a vehicle carrying people is one thing that, at least i for one think, should be done by a set of well coordinated group of professionals.
The beef I have with this scheme is that since it's the user that's inconvenienced by the spam, the bond money should be sent to them in the event of a violation. The fact that Microsoft is the one getting the funds is what makes it seem like a money grab.
Well the users are getting an email account for free with Hotmail. If they were paying for their accounts then i can see some logic in that.
But they still can't make a simple phone that just calls people and has a phone book.
Unfortunately that's pretty much all my current phone has (well, and SMS). What i wouldn't give to have at least one simple game in it for those long train rides.
Re:A better way to avoid this problem
on
Source Code Escrow
·
· Score: 1
"and OSS is the best all round solution"
I keep hearing this, but i've hardly seen anyone backing this up with any meaningful arguments (don't get me wrong i'm not agains OSS as such).
Re:A better way to avoid this problem
on
Source Code Escrow
·
· Score: 1
Insightful? wtf?
"If it were open source like it SHOULD BE"
Very well, i'm not busy right now so i suppose i'll feed this troll.
Who are you to declare that all source code should be free (which seems to be what you're implying, correct me if i'm wrong)?
If a company pours money and resources into developing some software they have a right to decide whether or not they want to release the source openly. I think that's enough said.
Does this actually mean something, or is it just a bunch of big words to confuse the general public?
A bit of both. Conventional helicopters need a tailrotor because main rotor is spun by a mechanism that is fixed to the body of the aircraft which tends to spin the body around too. This thing seems to use a tip-jet mechanism to spin the main rotor, ie the tips of the blades contain little jet nozzles to spin it around and since it isn't mechanically fixed to the body it won't tend to spin the body around too.
Sorry if that didn't as much sense as i wanted it to, i haven't slept in 2 days.
Slashdot Mirror
Then how about exercising some self-control, and just not spend too much?
Is the US supposed to rely on Russia for getting into space now?
News flash: It already does for manned space flights.
http://www.overpopulation.org/faq.html
They'll be here soon enough. It's nice to see that they're planning ahead.
seriously, i've never posted such a reply before but he/she deserves it. i only wish i had mod points left.
Also, they should Open Source this POS
Ummm... huh?
I hope you mean only releasing the source code for those who would like to see it, and not that you want the code developed according to the usual open source models.
Developing a system to control a vehicle carrying people is one thing that, at least i for one think, should be done by a set of well coordinated group of professionals.
Should've been pointing to here: Images for download
A lot of time projectors are just pointed at a wall. This projecter won't have the versitility to do that.
Umm, yes it will. You just won't work properly in a lit room.
Same. How i wish we really did have something to stab people in the face over the internet.
There are a few kinks to be worked out, like the fact that you can't turn the chip off. Privacy groups are going to dog-pile on that one.
I certainly could've done without that mental image.
The beef I have with this scheme is that since it's the user that's inconvenienced by the spam, the bond money should be sent to them in the event of a violation. The fact that Microsoft is the one getting the funds is what makes it seem like a money grab.
Well the users are getting an email account for free with Hotmail. If they were paying for their accounts then i can see some logic in that.
Don't you mean "n00b"?
Wow, a company trying to be profitable? That just boggles the mind.
... Beer is the mind-killer ...
You've obviously never heard of Buffalo Theory
But they still can't make a simple phone that just calls people and has a phone book.
Unfortunately that's pretty much all my current phone has (well, and SMS). What i wouldn't give to have at least one simple game in it for those long train rides.
make it CHEAP!!!
I'm sure that's a lot easier said than done.
"and OSS is the best all round solution"
I keep hearing this, but i've hardly seen anyone backing this up with any meaningful arguments (don't get me wrong i'm not agains OSS as such).
Insightful? wtf?
"If it were open source like it SHOULD BE"
Very well, i'm not busy right now so i suppose i'll feed this troll.
Who are you to declare that all source code should be free (which seems to be what you're implying, correct me if i'm wrong)?
If a company pours money and resources into developing some software they have a right to decide whether or not they want to release the source openly. I think that's enough said.
Does this actually mean something, or is it just a bunch of big words to confuse the general public?
A bit of both.
Conventional helicopters need a tailrotor because main rotor is spun by a mechanism that is fixed to the body of the aircraft which tends to spin the body around too. This thing seems to use a tip-jet mechanism to spin the main rotor, ie the tips of the blades contain little jet nozzles to spin it around and since it isn't mechanically fixed to the body it won't tend to spin the body around too.
Sorry if that didn't as much sense as i wanted it to, i haven't slept in 2 days.
Certainly in Belgium, the main ISP (ironically called "Skynet")
How exactly is that ironic?