Just Hold down shift and F5 while scrolling through the ribbon, select the change format from the hidden ribbon, click formats, then compatibility, then change. Uncheck 6 boxes, then click on 4 others. Do this for every document you have to save because it wont save the preferences and you to can have compatible documents!!!!!
No, Google is not being sued for lying. They are being sued for purposely circumventing a privacy control via what could be called a hack. Now, you can blame Apple for the fact that this hack was possible, but do you not blame the party who purposely circumvented the mechanism? If I can find a way to circumvent your computer's security mechanism, would you only blame the OS manufacturer, or would you be upset that I broke in?
The problem is that Webkit, the engine that Safari uses, told people how to do this in a bug report. Google didnt "hack" anything, the developers placed the ability to do it in the code.
18 years ago I messed up my back, 8 years ago I did it again. The second time around didnt have the results of the first. I live with constant pain while awake unless laying down. Pain is depressing, it ruins your attitude and life. I have learned to live with it, with pain pills to manage the pain. When sent to pain management every so often to get the pain medication adjusted methadone is always pushed, I am also low income. I have done a lot of study of pain drugs and will always tell the doctor that is one medication I want to avoid. At present I am on Percoset (oxycodone/acetaminophen). While it isnt as cheap as the methadone on my crappy insurance, my life is way more important than the $10 a month extra it costs me. But the problem may not be the drug itself but the idea that some people in pain have that they can avoid pain completely. This isnt always the case when you are on these types of medication. You can control pain, you can moderate pain. But if you think that if I take a pill or two extra it will get rid of it altogether you are on a slippery slope. My brother tried that, he ended up taking more and more pills because over time your body starts resisting them. Thats where the danger lies. You take so many that you end up killing yourself by overdose, like my brother did at 36.
On a debate on which the outcome is going to be framed on logic, tautologies, and proof... there is no way that a faith based position can prevail.
If a faith could be proven, it is no longer a faith. It is a fact.
At least you got a point I agree with, in fact I was going to post on the exact same thing. When a person of faith is in a debate where the basis of the discussion is facts its a loosing proposition. Because a lot of religion teaches is a fruit of faith, in other words we except it because of the faith we have. That's unfortunately as far as I can agree with you. Because it isnt God that decides who is punished for the individual sinning. He even gives them the clear path to not be punished for sin. It is only the persons fault that it happens. An example, A parent puts a cookie on a plate and sets it on a table. The parent tells the child that if they eat the cookie they will be punished. If the child eats the cookie and is punished, is it the parents fault? No.
"If your coworker walks away from his desk, will you jump on the opportunity to go through his GMail account?"
No, because its on their machine and you would be "searching through what isnt clearly visible on someone elses property. But if they were reading it on an open radio transmitter and you heard them on your radio while searching through the stations there would be no problem.
I have to disagree with that. Malware problem is usually because of user stupidity. Like any other OS, you can run Windows securely if you don't do stupid things.
Yes like 1. Spend money to run anti programs to fill in the holes left by bad code. 2. Dont download anything. 3. Dont use IE. 4. or simply unplug the computer from the internet.
But most people refuse to do any of those things. Then again they could just give Microsoft the boot.
That depends on the wording of the patent. If I use consists of, yes specific things need to be there. If I use includes, it may only be one of the things I describe. Also patents on mechanical devices are quite different in there requirements that software or business patents. A device would indeed cover a specific "thing" needed to implement an idea. But in software specific coding is not needed. For that we have copyright, there is no copyright for devices. Dont think I am for patents, or giving a all inclusive definition. The original person I replied to was confusing copyright and patents. Just dealing with software patents and not devices (hardware). Dont split hairs on a different example.
Thats an even more complex explanation of patent vs copyright. I seriously doubt those that cant even get that patents dont cover words will get that. I was trying to explain that patents cover, say for the sake of explaining, the idea of a scrollbar in a browser, vs the way its coded. Not that thats what this patents covered.
They didn't lift code from i4i. It appears you can't see past your hatred of Microsoft.
Oh wait, this is Slashdot.
Your right this is slashdot, also home to some of the worlds biggest Microsoft fanboy's, and/or possibly astoturfers.
What you missed in all this was that you are confusing Copyright and a patent. So here is where you are going off.
1. Patents cover ideas.
2. Copyrights cover the specific use of language.
To infringe on a patent you do not have to copy anything but the idea. It doesn't matter if the words or code are the same or not. But that you implemented the patented idea.
If Ms got rid of the ability to add custom XML, they would never be able to Extend the specification they proposed, and so Extinguish competition while everyone else plays catch up.
I would love to see a remake of any of the descent series remade. I still have each of them and from time to time have to play them even though they are getting old.
How about just plain old Flash? Adobe has yet to release a stable 64b linux Flash player. The hacks to make the 32b version work on 64b linux are rather poor, too. I'm sure Google would want to use 64b linux for their Chrome Window Manager, but that would be a hard sell to consumers with flaky Flash support.
Pure fud, the linux 64bit plugin works just as well as the windows flash plugin. The work arounds to install a 32bit plugin have not been needed for a long time.
"So while the method sucks... isn't this actually a reasonable place for government action, you know, in enforcing the law?"
The simple answer is... NO. While it is a good idea to punish commercial exploitation of copyright. Punishing end users only makes matters worse. That so many people are breaking this law points to the fact that it is unjust. Unjust laws should be removed, not reinforced. An example of this is Prohibition. Consuming Alcohol was against the law, but no one followed the law. The government saw eventually that the law was unjust because so many broke it, and it was removed. Should they have lined up all those that drank a beer and shot them and took their homes?
No, really, I get it. Linux needs a "killer app" and all that. How about the absence of an app that is a killer? Anti-virus! It sucks more than its fair share of resources.
Thats just it, there is no law that says making a copyrighted work available is against the law. The law says you have to distribute it to someone to break the law. That the RIAA will have a hard time proving it happened isnt the defendants fault, he doesnt have to help the RIAA prove he did anything. The RIAA has to prove he distributed the file to break the law. What might happen , or if he wanted to break the law makes no difference. An example. If I want to run red lights in my car, and place a sign on the car saying "I want to run red lights". I can drive down the street. But until a cop sees me actually run one I cant be convicted of a traffic offense of running a red light. Its not against the law to ride down the street wanting to run red lights, even if I advertise I want to do it. Neither can the cops pull me over and say because they are going off duty and cant see me drive I should get a ticket for running red lights anyway.
Once they have a system in place that they think will block illegal downloads (it will never really stop them)they open themselves up to lawsuits. After all they will have proved that they can stop them. Doesnt that open them up to lawsuits for those they do not stop? Then if they block something that isnt copyrighted, they open themselves to lawsuits.
Using GNU/HURD much lately? As a matter of fact , all most everyone using Linux uses part of it. The HURD kernel was the last part to be completed. Without the GNU/HURD project the rest of the software that the Linux kernel interacts with (everything but the Linux kernel) would not have existed at the time it was needed.
Stallman saw the need for a free operating system. Its just the project chose a difficult to perfect design for its kernel.
But he has shown an uncanny ability to see what is needed way before others. Granted for other reasons the Linux kernel will most likely not move to gplv3. But I cant help but feel that it is going to come back to haunt the Linux kernel in the long run.
Im an election judge in cook county IL. We have touch screens and paper ballots. When a voter fills out the paper ballot it is feed into a scanner that checks for errors like no votes in a race, or to many people voted in a race. The scanner returns the ballot on error. The voter is told that there may be a problem with the ballot and asked if they want a new ballot. If they want a new ballot, the old one gets SPOILED written in big letters on it and placed in the spoiled ballot envelope. If they dont want a new ballot , the ballot is reinserted and any races with to many votes or no votes in a race may not be counted in that race. The rest of the votes on it are counted.
I believe in helping, not just complaining. So I have done my best to help people since I started using Dapper Drake. The almost 4k posts have been mostly in the 64bit section of the English Ubuntu forums. Sadly someone has moded my original post with "troll". Far from it, these are observations I have made in dealing with Ubuntu and its developers. They are not intended to get someone to fight with me. As proof that I have experience with Ubuntu and the first post was from my experiences. vhttp://ubuntuforums.org/member.php?u=78588
As a long time Ubuntu user (almost 4k posts on the Ubuntu forum)I learned some things
1. Eye candy will always be worked on over functionality.
2. Ubuntu is a word that means "I don't know Debian exists"
3. Candy coating also is required in your dealings with other Ubuntu users.
4. Developers need to have the steps to do something spelled out or they dont do it.
5. If Debian doesnt implement a major improvement that isnt eye candy. It will never be done.
6. Developers have a right to make their mailing list private so they dont have to hear complaints.
7. When you know enough to use the terminal, you are overdue to switch distro's.
8. The idiot who cant install and complains is king for the day on the forums.
9. Not one Ubuntu new user knows what a search is. (And they want to turn on compiz? expect 20k new posts the day after release, all on the same subject)
10.The name of the next version is designed to make you think something other than eye candy is going to be added. But dont hold your breath or you will look like a blue baboon.
The next move from SCO will be a motion to stay everything while they appeal. That will delay everything, which is exactly what SCO wants. They should be made to wait and appeal after they have lost everything.
Slashdot Mirror
Just Hold down shift and F5 while scrolling through the ribbon, select the change format from the hidden ribbon, click formats, then compatibility, then change. Uncheck 6 boxes, then click on 4 others. Do this for every document you have to save because it wont save the preferences and you to can have compatible documents!!!!!
No, Google is not being sued for lying. They are being sued for purposely circumventing a privacy control via what could be called a hack. Now, you can blame Apple for the fact that this hack was possible, but do you not blame the party who purposely circumvented the mechanism? If I can find a way to circumvent your computer's security mechanism, would you only blame the OS manufacturer, or would you be upset that I broke in?
The problem is that Webkit, the engine that Safari uses, told people how to do this in a bug report. Google didnt "hack" anything, the developers placed the ability to do it in the code.
https://bugs.webkit.org/show_bug.cgi?id=35824
18 years ago I messed up my back, 8 years ago I did it again. The second time around didnt have the results of the first. I live with constant pain while awake unless laying down.
Pain is depressing, it ruins your attitude and life. I have learned to live with it, with pain pills to manage the pain. When sent to pain management every so often to get the pain medication adjusted methadone is always pushed, I am also low income. I have done a lot of study of pain drugs and will always tell the doctor that is one medication I want to avoid. At present I am on Percoset (oxycodone/acetaminophen). While it isnt as cheap as the methadone on my crappy insurance, my life is way more important than the $10 a month extra it costs me.
But the problem may not be the drug itself but the idea that some people in pain have that they can avoid pain completely. This isnt always the case when you are on these types of medication. You can control pain, you can moderate pain. But if you think that if I take a pill or two extra it will get rid of it altogether you are on a slippery slope. My brother tried that, he ended up taking more and more pills because over time your body starts resisting them. Thats where the danger lies. You take so many that you end up killing yourself by overdose, like my brother did at 36.
On a debate on which the outcome is going to be framed on logic, tautologies, and proof... there is no way that a faith based position can prevail.
If a faith could be proven, it is no longer a faith. It is a fact.
At least you got a point I agree with, in fact I was going to post on the exact same thing. When a person of faith is in a debate where the basis of the discussion is facts its a loosing proposition. Because a lot of religion teaches is a fruit of faith, in other words we except it because of the faith we have.
That's unfortunately as far as I can agree with you. Because it isnt God that decides who is punished for the individual sinning. He even gives them the clear path to not be punished for sin. It is only the persons fault that it happens. An example, A parent puts a cookie on a plate and sets it on a table. The parent tells the child that if they eat the cookie they will be punished. If the child eats the cookie and is punished, is it the parents fault? No.
"If your coworker walks away from his desk, will you jump on the opportunity to go through his GMail account?"
No, because its on their machine and you would be "searching through what isnt clearly visible on someone elses property. But if they were reading it on an open radio transmitter and you heard them on your radio while searching through the stations there would be no problem.
I have to disagree with that. Malware problem is usually because of user stupidity. Like any other OS, you can run Windows securely if you don't do stupid things.
Yes like
1. Spend money to run anti programs to fill in the holes left by bad code.
2. Dont download anything.
3. Dont use IE.
4. or simply unplug the computer from the internet.
But most people refuse to do any of those things. Then again they could just give Microsoft the boot.
The lead in says its "a bug in most deployed versions of Linux"
Then says in the excerpt " in the upcoming 2.6.32 release candidate of the Linux kernel"
Its a release candidate, therefore it cant be in "most deployed versions".
The newest version of Ubuntu (karmic) for instance only uses 2.6.31.
That depends on the wording of the patent. If I use consists of, yes specific things need to be there. If I use includes, it may only be one of the things I describe. Also patents on mechanical devices are quite different in there requirements that software or business patents. A device would indeed cover a specific "thing" needed to implement an idea. But in software specific coding is not needed. For that we have copyright, there is no copyright for devices.
Dont think I am for patents, or giving a all inclusive definition. The original person I replied to was confusing copyright and patents. Just dealing with software patents and not devices (hardware). Dont split hairs on a different example.
Thats an even more complex explanation of patent vs copyright. I seriously doubt those that cant even get that patents dont cover words will get that. I was trying to explain that patents cover, say for the sake of explaining, the idea of a scrollbar in a browser, vs the way its coded. Not that thats what this patents covered.
Your right this is slashdot, also home to some of the worlds biggest Microsoft fanboy's, and/or possibly astoturfers.
What you missed in all this was that you are confusing Copyright and a patent. So here is where you are going off.
1. Patents cover ideas.
2. Copyrights cover the specific use of language.
To infringe on a patent you do not have to copy anything but the idea. It doesn't matter if the words or code are the same or not. But that you implemented the patented idea.
If Ms got rid of the ability to add custom XML, they would never be able to Extend the specification they proposed, and so Extinguish competition while everyone else plays catch up.
Yes, Im waiting to read about it being subverted by some malware or virus, its just a matter of time.
I would love to see a remake of any of the descent series remade. I still have each of them and from time to time have to play them even though they are getting old.
How about just plain old Flash? Adobe has yet to release a stable 64b linux Flash player. The hacks to make the 32b version work on 64b linux are rather poor, too. I'm sure Google would want to use 64b linux for their Chrome Window Manager, but that would be a hard sell to consumers with flaky Flash support.
Pure fud, the linux 64bit plugin works just as well as the windows flash plugin. The work arounds to install a 32bit plugin have not been needed for a long time.
The fact that 3 people who have killed police officers played violent video games results in this law? How about this.
All cop killers have breathed oxygen.
Therefore use of oxygen may lead to killing cops.
So they should outlaw breathing oxygen,
Starting in the Utah state house and senate.
Im sure that it will be much more effective in stopping crime. :)
Than they would have searched to see if the company was reliable.
"So while the method sucks... isn't this actually a reasonable place for government action, you know, in enforcing the law?"
The simple answer is... NO. While it is a good idea to punish commercial exploitation of copyright. Punishing end users only makes matters worse. That so many people are breaking this law points to the fact that it is unjust. Unjust laws should be removed, not reinforced. An example of this is Prohibition. Consuming Alcohol was against the law, but no one followed the law. The government saw eventually that the law was unjust because so many broke it, and it was removed.
Should they have lined up all those that drank a beer and shot them and took their homes?
Thats just it, there is no law that says making a copyrighted work available is against the law. The law says you have to distribute it to someone to break the law.
That the RIAA will have a hard time proving it happened isnt the defendants fault, he doesnt have to help the RIAA prove he did anything. The RIAA has to prove he distributed the file to break the law. What might happen , or if he wanted to break the law makes no difference.
An example. If I want to run red lights in my car, and place a sign on the car saying "I want to run red lights". I can drive down the street. But until a cop sees me actually run one I cant be convicted of a traffic offense of running a red light. Its not against the law to ride down the street wanting to run red lights, even if I advertise I want to do it. Neither can the cops pull me over and say because they are going off duty and cant see me drive I should get a ticket for running red lights anyway.
Once they have a system in place that they think will block illegal downloads (it will never really stop them)they open themselves up to lawsuits. After all they will have proved that they can stop them. Doesnt that open them up to lawsuits for those they do not stop? Then if they block something that isnt copyrighted, they open themselves to lawsuits.
Stallman saw the need for a free operating system. Its just the project chose a difficult to perfect design for its kernel.
But he has shown an uncanny ability to see what is needed way before others. Granted for other reasons the Linux kernel will most likely not move to gplv3. But I cant help but feel that it is going to come back to haunt the Linux kernel in the long run.
Im an election judge in cook county IL. We have touch screens and paper ballots. When a voter fills out the paper ballot it is feed into a scanner that checks for errors like no votes in a race, or to many people voted in a race. The scanner returns the ballot on error. The voter is told that there may be a problem with the ballot and asked if they want a new ballot. If they want a new ballot, the old one gets SPOILED written in big letters on it and placed in the spoiled ballot envelope. If they dont want a new ballot , the ballot is reinserted and any races with to many votes or no votes in a race may not be counted in that race. The rest of the votes on it are counted.
I believe in helping, not just complaining. So I have done my best to help people since I started using Dapper Drake. The almost 4k posts have been mostly in the 64bit section of the English Ubuntu forums. Sadly someone has moded my original post with "troll". Far from it, these are observations I have made in dealing with Ubuntu and its developers. They are not intended to get someone to fight with me.
As proof that I have experience with Ubuntu and the first post was from my experiences. vhttp://ubuntuforums.org/member.php?u=78588
As a long time Ubuntu user (almost 4k posts on the Ubuntu forum)I learned some things 1. Eye candy will always be worked on over functionality. 2. Ubuntu is a word that means "I don't know Debian exists" 3. Candy coating also is required in your dealings with other Ubuntu users. 4. Developers need to have the steps to do something spelled out or they dont do it. 5. If Debian doesnt implement a major improvement that isnt eye candy. It will never be done. 6. Developers have a right to make their mailing list private so they dont have to hear complaints. 7. When you know enough to use the terminal, you are overdue to switch distro's. 8. The idiot who cant install and complains is king for the day on the forums. 9. Not one Ubuntu new user knows what a search is. (And they want to turn on compiz? expect 20k new posts the day after release, all on the same subject) 10.The name of the next version is designed to make you think something other than eye candy is going to be added. But dont hold your breath or you will look like a blue baboon.
The next move from SCO will be a motion to stay everything while they appeal. That will delay everything, which is exactly what SCO wants. They should be made to wait and appeal after they have lost everything.