Yes, because you have modified the agreement the vendor showed to you.
I don't know. You did not generate the agreement, the vendor did. And you made changes to the pricing before the agreement was generated or entered into by the vendor. Like in the real world, I call up a vendor who is advertising, say Xeon CPUs for $40 each. I tell the sales drone I'd like four, but I'm only willing to pay $30 each. The sales drone agrees to the price, and it is entered onto the sale order. When the sales drones boss takes a look at it, and says '$30?? It's $40, or nothing. Change the price.' he is pretty much screwed. He must either honour the price or face a lawsuit for the difference when he invoices me for $40 each.
Now in this situation, the vendor is leaving the offer price open to the consumer, and not double checking before it is slapped on the semi-binding sale agreement. It's the vendors problem, not yours. You should never enter into any agreement you haven't read, nor are reasonably guaranteed to know the contents of. Same rule applies, technology or no.
Actually, I have a NEC Ready, runs on a MediaGx, dinky little 640x480 LCD. One fully charged battery will play mp3s for two hours with the backlight *on* and PCMCIA Ether, without I can get up to six. On the *standard* battery, not the high-cap. I've had a few company issued Librettos, and I haven't been able to get nearly that sort of life out of them. They barely do better than Dells offerings, at least in my experience.
I doubt there is any similarity. I read a bit of Russian, and the translation of 'Stalin' (Leo Trotsky's bio of Joseph Stalin, which ended up with three blood spattered chapters because Stalin had him assasinated) does absolutly no justice to the original. It's vivid, alive. The translation is dead, overanalyzed. Kind of like Das Kapital (Marx/Engels). The original paints a picture, the translation leaves you with a cold feeling.
You are prolly just reading academic stoichisms in the translation. RMS speaks like he has a stick up his ass...
Dallas has been making the buttons and the TINI for a few ywars now; I remember reading about the TINI in some trash Java mag in Sep 1999, and I know the i-Button has been in production since early 1996 cuz I've had one on my key ring since then..
My ass.
I've seen unions in action in the auto industry. There's a reason you really don't want a Pontiac built on a Friday afternoon, and that reason is the union.
Well, the First Amendment doesn't neccessarily apply to an 8 year old. You don't get Rights until you can accept the Responsibilities that come attached to them.
Unfortunatly, our criminal justice system has shown that you have those 'responsibilities' from about age 10 on, with their insistance on prosecuting mere children as adults. If a 12 year old can be sentanced to spend the next 20 years of his life in prison, he better damn well get the Bill of Rights.
If this happens, there is no money to pay programmers. As a result, intelligent people such as myself, who could command 6 figure salaries in any profession will take different career paths.
With fewer programmers, the result will be less innovation and worse software.
Furthermore, universities, etc. won't be able to afford to run computing courses,
Hooey, all of it. If indeed you were an intelligent person perhaps you'd have a better grasp of service based economies.
This is really simplifying it, but.
There is $(x) amount in the pool, and a fixed demand. In the current system, where one purchases a software product, there is $(x-y) actually going to the programmers, where y is dictated by the amount of profit the software companies make.
Now in an open model, where the software is free and customizable but there is no support, there is still $(x) and the same number of 'sales', but that $(x) is paid directly to the programmers, support techs, etc, by way of salary. In addition, there is a higher demand for said programmers.
This one is a harmless worm. Polite even. It even sets a registry flag so it won't run more than once.
Y'know, it'd be cheaper to just make everyone click it and not have to worry about reinfection than to spend money on a virus scanner. Or hell, less money on bandwidth spent by clicking it than downloading a new definition file.
We've got a few thousand users in fifteen countries. If all infections were like todays spat of VBS/SST.Worm, it'd cost us more money to find the yearly cost than the cost itself.
But we do tend to get a nasty one about once a year. Win/CIH, ILUVYOU, etc. License costs of all the various scanners runs five figures. Planning, annoying the users to update their definition files, installing the software adds on cost as well.
Quick fudging says the actual expended cost per user, per year is under $25. (Probably closer to $18, but I'll go high to be safe) Now, if we assume there are 200 million computers in business use in the US, (Once again, high and safe) I only get $5 billion.
Either the rest of the companies out there are doing a bad job preparing for viruses and a bad job dealing with them, or the $12.1 figure was just pulled out of someones ass.
Nope. When they capped karma, they just made it so no positive moderation could be done to accounts with more than 50 karma. They didn't shave karma off the stack, they just made it so you couldn't accrue any more. Positive moderations do nothing, but negative ones bite you. I could score +5 with four +1's and a -1, and only the -1 would have any effect.
When it was capped, I had right around 250, and have managed to dwindle it down to 212 since. I figure if I keep up my regular rate of posts, I'll make it down to 50 sometime in March, 2004.
Re:no wonder flashcom is bankrupt...
on
DSL Woes
·
· Score: 2
Since then, I've been charged for seven months of service that I haven't used because I no longer live where their DSL was available
Are you a moron? Did your mother drop you down the stairs of a fifth floor walk-up? No service, no check. Paying by CC? Call the CC company and tell them that any and all charges from Flashcom are bogus, as the result of a billing mistake, and that you will not pay them for any such charges.
Don't go blaming your own stupidity on Communists.
I think it's just pulling from a fortune file. The file is probably too big for him to have screened all the entries, and he shouldn't have to.
You have a problem, write him a polite email and have him knock it out of the file. Don't go bitching like he's suddenly some sort of Final Solution nutcase.
Me, I found it funny, but then again it's probably the fact that when I stopped for gas this morning I was next to a teenage Hispanic driving a bashed-up multicolor Caprice in a three-piece that looked a size too big.
"Fucking rain."
"I know. Now I'm gonna have to have this suit dry-cleaned"
"Yeah, it's hell on wool. Funeral?"
"No, court date."
"Oh. Sorry. Know if the coffee here is any good?"
"I think it's an instant machine."
"Okay, so long as it ain't a pot of tar thats been boiling since the Reagan administration."
"Heh."
The legal definition of "obvious to a person skilled in the art" is "the invention has been described in a publication more than one year before the filing date."
Let me make this short. No.
Those are two seperate test clauses you've managed to run together. The important bits are:
(from 35 U.S.C. 103) "if the differences between the subject matter sought to be patented and the prior art are such that the subject matter as a whole would have been obvious at the time the invention was made to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which said subject matter pertains."
(from 35 U.S.C. 102) "the invention was patented or described in a printed publication in this or a foreign country or in public use or on sale in this country, more than one year prior to the date of the application for patent in the United States"
In this case, it probably passes the test in 102 (Only Symantec knows) but it fails 103 miserably. Far more than miserably in fact, as I am a programmer of much less than ordinary skill. For me, a compiler is more useful as a spelling / grammar checker than as an actual compiler.
Did you read the article? (No). What does the article say? To sum it up, "They patented a method of updating virus definition files that is more efficient, using less space than updating the entire file". They said nothing about how. Did I read the patent? If I had, I wouldn't have asked 'Where's the patent'. Now, I just gave you how it is done. Therefore it is obvious.
In case you misread me again, I'll sum it up in a nice concise all-caps sentance, in bold I may add.
THE HOW IS OBVIOUS.
If someone were to ask me how to update any sequence of incrementally changed repeating records with the lowest possible data overhead, I would suggest the same thing; Use a change vector, or as one other poster put it, use a delta. Having now skimmed the patent, it appears to be a multi-part change vector with revision stamping.
In case you misread me yet again, I'll sum it up in another nice concise all-caps sentance, in bold I may add.
I TOLD YOU WHAT THE PATENT DID BASED ONLY ON ITS GOAL. IT IS THEREFORE OBVIOUS.
There is only one way I can think of that would be better than a regular UNIXy patch. Using a change vector from another virus. EG, there are fifteen thousand variations on LoveBug and CIM, not to mention the classic Stone-B, each differing only slightly. So, instead of resending the entire definition with each variant, they send a vector that reads 'Variant: STB001. New variant:STB002. New partial search tag at offset 0x003, 0x060F1E667. New partial search signature at offset 0x004, 0x00000000".
Good one. You actually sounded like a vicious license zealot. May I suggest next time, you base the troll on the premise that "FSF? Communist? They're just enforcing Christian sharing morality in an increasingly immoral and cut throat society." Early enough, it should get you a +5 Interesting..
Seeing as this is the only explanation other than insanity
Insanity? Naw, there are plenty!
1. Hemos didn't check the link.
2. Hemos checked the link, but cancelled the transfer without noticing the size. 3. Hemos has his own OC-192, and he never noticed. One paltry gig does tend to fly by, y'know. 4. Hemos has a grudge against the guy running the server. 5. Hemos is doing the guy running the server a favor; After all, nothing like a slashdotting to get your hardware budget increased! 6. Hemos is drunk. 7. CmdrTaco is drunk, and posting as Hemos. 8. There's a pool running on how many downloads there will be, and Hemos has his money on "150" 9. The upstream provider is offering a PlayStation 2 to the first customer to exceed 20,000Gb/s for a sustained period, and Hemos wants one.
creating nothing more than a system by which they may exploit the rights of genuine coders who wish to make their work truly free
And they do this how?
"Today, we've switched Joe Programmer's normal license with the GPL. " "Shhh.. Let's see if he notices.. " "Joe can't tell the difference!" " GPL, now with Flavour Crystals!" (apologies to Folgers).
They wish to spread the evil practice of licensing, and even attempt to say that such licensing will aid in giving software freedom! How ridiculous is that!
That's like saying that you shouldn't grab your guns and pop off a few enemy soldiers when the Canadians decide to conquer Buffalo, because then "you'll only serve to further the spread of war and violence, which are bad, mmmkay?". Software companies fight the freedom of code and users with onerous licenses, we fight back with licenses.
There is only one way to truly free content[snip]
Sure is! Let each programmer freely choose his license, and let him be secure in the fact that someone else isn't going to flame him for it. That's freedom.
Slashdot Mirror
Yes, because you have modified the agreement the vendor showed to you.
I don't know. You did not generate the agreement, the vendor did. And you made changes to the pricing before the agreement was generated or entered into by the vendor. Like in the real world, I call up a vendor who is advertising, say Xeon CPUs for $40 each. I tell the sales drone I'd like four, but I'm only willing to pay $30 each. The sales drone agrees to the price, and it is entered onto the sale order. When the sales drones boss takes a look at it, and says '$30?? It's $40, or nothing. Change the price.' he is pretty much screwed. He must either honour the price or face a lawsuit for the difference when he invoices me for $40 each.
Now in this situation, the vendor is leaving the offer price open to the consumer, and not double checking before it is slapped on the semi-binding sale agreement. It's the vendors problem, not yours. You should never enter into any agreement you haven't read, nor are reasonably guaranteed to know the contents of. Same rule applies, technology or no.
Actually, I have a NEC Ready, runs on a MediaGx, dinky little 640x480 LCD. One fully charged battery will play mp3s for two hours with the backlight *on* and PCMCIA Ether, without I can get up to six. On the *standard* battery, not the high-cap. I've had a few company issued Librettos, and I haven't been able to get nearly that sort of life out of them. They barely do better than Dells offerings, at least in my experience.
Libretto? Naw. There's no battery life to them.
I doubt there is any similarity. I read a bit of Russian, and the translation of 'Stalin' (Leo Trotsky's bio of Joseph Stalin, which ended up with three blood spattered chapters because Stalin had him assasinated) does absolutly no justice to the original. It's vivid, alive. The translation is dead, overanalyzed. Kind of like Das Kapital (Marx/Engels). The original paints a picture, the translation leaves you with a cold feeling.
You are prolly just reading academic stoichisms in the translation. RMS speaks like he has a stick up his ass...
Dallas has been making the buttons and the TINI for a few ywars now; I remember reading about the TINI in some trash Java mag in Sep 1999, and I know the i-Button has been in production since early 1996 cuz I've had one on my key ring since then..
My ass. I've seen unions in action in the auto industry. There's a reason you really don't want a Pontiac built on a Friday afternoon, and that reason is the union.
Well, the First Amendment doesn't neccessarily apply to an 8 year old. You don't get Rights until you can accept the Responsibilities that come attached to them.
Unfortunatly, our criminal justice system has shown that you have those 'responsibilities' from about age 10 on, with their insistance on prosecuting mere children as adults. If a 12 year old can be sentanced to spend the next 20 years of his life in prison, he better damn well get the Bill of Rights.
A message from your friends at Microsoft
That's a privacy policy I could live with.
If this happens, there is no money to pay programmers. As a result, intelligent people such as myself, who could command 6 figure salaries in any profession will take different career paths.
With fewer programmers, the result will be less innovation and worse software.
Furthermore, universities, etc. won't be able to afford to run computing courses,
Hooey, all of it. If indeed you were an intelligent person perhaps you'd have a better grasp of service based economies.
This is really simplifying it, but.
There is $(x) amount in the pool, and a fixed demand. In the current system, where one purchases a software product, there is $(x-y) actually going to the programmers, where y is dictated by the amount of profit the software companies make.
Now in an open model, where the software is free and customizable but there is no support, there is still $(x) and the same number of 'sales', but that $(x) is paid directly to the programmers, support techs, etc, by way of salary. In addition, there is a higher demand for said programmers.
This one is a harmless worm. Polite even. It even sets a registry flag so it won't run more than once.
Y'know, it'd be cheaper to just make everyone click it and not have to worry about reinfection than to spend money on a virus scanner. Or hell, less money on bandwidth spent by clicking it than downloading a new definition file.
Oops. 17.1 billion..
We've got a few thousand users in fifteen countries. If all infections were like todays spat of VBS/SST.Worm, it'd cost us more money to find the yearly cost than the cost itself.
But we do tend to get a nasty one about once a year. Win/CIH, ILUVYOU, etc. License costs of all the various scanners runs five figures. Planning, annoying the users to update their definition files, installing the software adds on cost as well.
Quick fudging says the actual expended cost per user, per year is under $25. (Probably closer to $18, but I'll go high to be safe) Now, if we assume there are 200 million computers in business use in the US, (Once again, high and safe) I only get $5 billion.
Either the rest of the companies out there are doing a bad job preparing for viruses and a bad job dealing with them, or the $12.1 figure was just pulled out of someones ass.
If you were watching Millionaire last night, you'd know that Lars' mental program would fit quite nicely in 640K.
Nope. When they capped karma, they just made it so no positive moderation could be done to accounts with more than 50 karma. They didn't shave karma off the stack, they just made it so you couldn't accrue any more. Positive moderations do nothing, but negative ones bite you. I could score +5 with four +1's and a -1, and only the -1 would have any effect.
When it was capped, I had right around 250, and have managed to dwindle it down to 212 since. I figure if I keep up my regular rate of posts, I'll make it down to 50 sometime in March, 2004.
Since then, I've been charged for seven months of service that I haven't used because I no longer live where their DSL was available
Are you a moron? Did your mother drop you down the stairs of a fifth floor walk-up? No service, no check. Paying by CC? Call the CC company and tell them that any and all charges from Flashcom are bogus, as the result of a billing mistake, and that you will not pay them for any such charges.
Don't go blaming your own stupidity on Communists.
I think it's just pulling from a fortune file. The file is probably too big for him to have screened all the entries, and he shouldn't have to.
You have a problem, write him a polite email and have him knock it out of the file. Don't go bitching like he's suddenly some sort of Final Solution nutcase.
Me, I found it funny, but then again it's probably the fact that when I stopped for gas this morning I was next to a teenage Hispanic driving a bashed-up multicolor Caprice in a three-piece that looked a size too big.
"Fucking rain."
"I know. Now I'm gonna have to have this suit dry-cleaned"
"Yeah, it's hell on wool. Funeral?"
"No, court date."
"Oh. Sorry. Know if the coffee here is any good?"
"I think it's an instant machine."
"Okay, so long as it ain't a pot of tar thats been boiling since the Reagan administration."
"Heh."
The legal definition of "obvious to a person skilled in the art" is "the invention has been described in a publication more than one year before the filing date."
Let me make this short. No.
Those are two seperate test clauses you've managed to run together. The important bits are:
(from 35 U.S.C. 103) "if the differences between the subject matter sought to be patented and the prior art are such that the subject matter as a whole would have been obvious at the time the invention was made to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which said subject matter pertains."
(from 35 U.S.C. 102) "the invention was patented or described in a printed publication in this or a foreign country or in public use or on sale in this country, more than one year prior to the date of the application for patent in the United States"
In this case, it probably passes the test in 102 (Only Symantec knows) but it fails 103 miserably. Far more than miserably in fact, as I am a programmer of much less than ordinary skill. For me, a compiler is more useful as a spelling / grammar checker than as an actual compiler.
Did you read the article? (No). What does the article say? To sum it up, "They patented a method of updating virus definition files that is more efficient, using less space than updating the entire file". They said nothing about how. Did I read the patent? If I had, I wouldn't have asked 'Where's the patent'. Now, I just gave you how it is done. Therefore it is obvious.
In case you misread me again, I'll sum it up in a nice concise all-caps sentance, in bold I may add.
THE HOW IS OBVIOUS.
If someone were to ask me how to update any sequence of incrementally changed repeating records with the lowest possible data overhead, I would suggest the same thing; Use a change vector, or as one other poster put it, use a delta. Having now skimmed the patent, it appears to be a multi-part change vector with revision stamping.
In case you misread me yet again, I'll sum it up in another nice concise all-caps sentance, in bold I may add.
I TOLD YOU WHAT THE PATENT DID BASED ONLY ON ITS GOAL. IT IS THEREFORE OBVIOUS.
There is only one way I can think of that would be better than a regular UNIXy patch. Using a change vector from another virus. EG, there are fifteen thousand variations on LoveBug and CIM, not to mention the classic Stone-B, each differing only slightly. So, instead of resending the entire definition with each variant, they send a vector that reads 'Variant: STB001. New variant:STB002. New partial search tag at offset 0x003, 0x060F1E667. New partial search signature at offset 0x004, 0x00000000".
If this is the case, how is it not obvious?
Good one. You actually sounded like a vicious license zealot. May I suggest next time, you base the troll on the premise that "FSF? Communist? They're just enforcing Christian sharing morality in an increasingly immoral and cut throat society." Early enough, it should get you a +5 Interesting..
Seeing as this is the only explanation other than insanity
Insanity? Naw, there are plenty!
1. Hemos didn't check the link.
2. Hemos checked the link, but cancelled the transfer without noticing the size.
3. Hemos has his own OC-192, and he never noticed. One paltry gig does tend to fly by, y'know.
4. Hemos has a grudge against the guy running the server.
5. Hemos is doing the guy running the server a favor; After all, nothing like a slashdotting to get your hardware budget increased!
6. Hemos is drunk.
7. CmdrTaco is drunk, and posting as Hemos.
8. There's a pool running on how many downloads there will be, and Hemos has his money on "150"
9. The upstream provider is offering a PlayStation 2 to the first customer to exceed 20,000Gb/s for a sustained period, and Hemos wants one.
creating nothing more than a system by which they may exploit the rights of genuine coders who wish to make their work truly free
And they do this how?
"Today, we've switched Joe Programmer's normal license with the GPL. "
"Shhh.. Let's see if he notices.. "
"Joe can't tell the difference!"
" GPL, now with Flavour Crystals!"
(apologies to Folgers).
They wish to spread the evil practice of licensing, and even attempt to say that such licensing will aid in giving software freedom! How ridiculous is that!
That's like saying that you shouldn't grab your guns and pop off a few enemy soldiers when the Canadians decide to conquer Buffalo, because then "you'll only serve to further the spread of war and violence, which are bad, mmmkay?". Software companies fight the freedom of code and users with onerous licenses, we fight back with licenses.
There is only one way to truly free content[snip]
Sure is! Let each programmer freely choose his license, and let him be secure in the fact that someone else isn't going to flame him for it. That's freedom.
Sorry, folks. Some idiot with a backhoe took out half the Sprint backbone again.
Move along, there's nothing to see here.
Both 2.0 and 3.0 had solitaire, but only via the add-on Microsoft Games package.