Contrary to popular belief, the accesible uranium deposits are very exhaustible. If the world switched to nuclear for all its energy needs, the uranium price would go way up. Here are estimates of uranium reserves.
If a site is specialized enough, it will show public service ads often. www.generals.dk did that until we turned public service ads off. Now you often get pages without ads.
This happens simply because Google can't find any appropriate adverts to put in.
If a site is specialized enough, it will show public service ads often. www.generals.dk did that until we turned public service ads off. Now you often get pages without ads.
This happens simply because Google can't find any appropriate adverts to put in.
I hope you're correct, but there are those who have compared modern Intellectual Property trends with a second enclosure movement and unfortunately, even many in the F/OSS movement seem to prefer more control over their creative works.
Thank you for the link. You are right that the position of the F/OSS movement has changed a lot. There are even those who think copyright is a positive simply because it enables the GPL. People try so hard to be reasonable and see things from both sides that when one side gets dragged off for miles, they have to follow to stay in the "middle".
Even if the future isn't going to sway against copyright anytime soon, does that mean we should all just switch to the "winning" side?
Personally I see the draconian measures as a sign of desperation. I have a hope that the people will eventually rise against them and get rid of them, preferably peacefully. It may be wishful thinking of course -- it was also said that the increase in Iraqi fighting was a sign of desperation among supporters of Saddam Hussein.
Your so-called low rates are still at a dollar a minute in Denmark. Even on the 3G networks. Except when you call the other customer on the 3G network at night, then it's free. Very useful, that.
I forgot another thing the handset producers are very carefully not doing: the Bluetooth handset profile. Lots of phones have Bluetooth support, and it's very simple to implement the handset profile. With that, you can use your cell phone as handset for a VoIP program if you have a Bluetooth card in your computer, or you can buy access points with Bluetooth and phone jacks which will allow you to call VoIP and over the regular phone network from the handset.
This could be possible with practically no extra effort for the producers. It is a feature which customers want. Yet the current market ensures that it does not exist.
I have wanted a dual mode DECT/GSM phone for years. Unfortunately GSM handsets are not developed to be sold to consumers; they are developed to be sold to the cellular providers which then pass the phones off to the consumers for "free".
Therefore the handset producers are very careful to not anger the providers by making products like those dual mode phones. Also, that is why the producers are pushing camera phones so heavily. It is not because most consumers really want a camera on their phone, but because the providers are desperate for something that will make the billions they wasted on upgrading the network for data transfer look like money well spent. The cellular providers have a long painful history of making the wrong decisions, and as a result most of them have been losing money since they started.
This is all from a European perspective, but DECT isn't used much (at all?) in the US.
Cosmic radiation is a pretty frequent cause of bitflips. Another frequent cause is alpha-emission from the chip packaging material. Lots of articles about the problem, like this one.
If there is a toaster shortage, you can build a new factory pretty rapidly. Not so with chips. With cars, demand is pretty steady and factories are rarely used to capacity. If you have a chip factory which is not used to capacity, producing an extra chip is very cheap, so it is a waste to not produce as many as you can. On the other hand, producing an extra car is rather expensive even when the factory is otherwise idle -- so idle capacity doesn't push car prices down to unsustainable levels.
The whole case was started by competitors who complained about Microsofts behaviour hurting them. The ruling is trying to help the competitors who complained.
It doesn't do much good for Free Software, but that wasn't the intention anyway.
I really don't care about Sun's or IBM's or Microsoft's bottom line. I want Java because I see Mono as an unacceptable risk. Sun is doomed anyway, open source Java won't change that one way or the other.
Meteors tend to be so nasty because they don't share their orbit with Earth. This means that on average, they hit the Earth with the speed of Earth's orbit around the sun, 30km/s. Some slower, because they hit from behind, others faster due to head-on collisions.
An asteroid which was brought into Earth orbit would necessarily have a very low speed relative to Earth. Therefore it would be much less destructive if it hit. Still nasty of course, depending on the size, but there are lots of dangerous things on Earth already.
If I need java I will download it just like if I need eclipse or struts.
Sure you will. I really hate the way the Java package drops crap where it doesn't belong in the file system, but ok, I can download it too. However, asking some random person to download some batch script that turns into an RPM which must then be installed really is too much. This kind of trouble ensures that Java stays firmly on the server.
I don't particularly mind that Java stays on the server; I can't really see the benefits of not compiling code to binary. At least not if you don't go all the way to a language like Scheme/LISP. However, others can, and that will bring the.NET VM to the Linux desktop. Despite Miguel de Icaza's assurances, I find that highly risky, and I would prefer that it didn't happen. Java could help keep.NET at bay, but it needs to be Free Software for that to happen. I hope that GCJ will solve the problem, or that Parrot makes both.NET and Java irrelevant on the Linux desktop.
Does that really sound like a good idea? So now you can code to an old version of Java, and be reasonably sure that the resulting program will run on any Linux distribution without forcing people to download anything. That should pretty much ensure that noone codes to the newer versions. *poof* End of Java evolution.
That is, by the way, much like the current situation. If you want to make a Java program and you want to distribute it on Linux, you better make sure that it works with GCJ. A very good open source JVM would instantly kill off lesser JVM's like kaffe and reduce the horrible fragmentation that Java suffers from right now.
The damning clause is this one: "and only bundled as part of, and for the sole purpose of running, your Programs" (my emphasis)
Shipping Java with a Linux distro would make it possible to run Java programs not delivered with the distro. It would be hard to argue that this would not be the purpose of including Java. And even if it was the sole purpose of including Java, what good would it do to have a Java included when you have to download another one to be able to run, say, Java applets?
SpecIntBase is not relevant for the majority of customers. The kind of highly optimized code that modern compilers spit out when they are fed the SpecInt suite is practically never seen in shrinkwrapped software. SpecInt is perhaps relevant to users of Free Software who recompile everything with icc. The rest of the world will never see that kind of performance.
When it comes to x86, the most relevant benchmarks are based on shrinkwrapped software.
Slashdot Mirror
Contrary to popular belief, the accesible uranium deposits are very exhaustible. If the world switched to nuclear for all its energy needs, the uranium price would go way up. Here are estimates of uranium reserves.
This happens simply because Google can't find any appropriate adverts to put in.
This happens simply because Google can't find any appropriate adverts to put in.
Thank you for the link. You are right that the position of the F/OSS movement has changed a lot. There are even those who think copyright is a positive simply because it enables the GPL. People try so hard to be reasonable and see things from both sides that when one side gets dragged off for miles, they have to follow to stay in the "middle".
Personally I see the draconian measures as a sign of desperation. I have a hope that the people will eventually rise against them and get rid of them, preferably peacefully. It may be wishful thinking of course -- it was also said that the increase in Iraqi fighting was a sign of desperation among supporters of Saddam Hussein.
Your so-called low rates are still at a dollar a minute in Denmark. Even on the 3G networks. Except when you call the other customer on the 3G network at night, then it's free. Very useful, that.
Great. Unfortunately it doesn't seem to support VoIP. That makes it rather pointless.
This could be possible with practically no extra effort for the producers. It is a feature which customers want. Yet the current market ensures that it does not exist.
Therefore the handset producers are very careful to not anger the providers by making products like those dual mode phones. Also, that is why the producers are pushing camera phones so heavily. It is not because most consumers really want a camera on their phone, but because the providers are desperate for something that will make the billions they wasted on upgrading the network for data transfer look like money well spent. The cellular providers have a long painful history of making the wrong decisions, and as a result most of them have been losing money since they started.
This is all from a European perspective, but DECT isn't used much (at all?) in the US.
Of course you can build error correction and recovery into UDP. At which point you have reinvented TCP. Congratulations.
The password is joshua. Duh.
GPL'ing Solaris would allow Solaris to use Linux drivers though. That could be a great advantage.
Cosmic radiation is a pretty frequent cause of bitflips. Another frequent cause is alpha-emission from the chip packaging material. Lots of articles about the problem, like this one.
I don't trust the machines. I want the option of having everyone else using the paper ballot too.
The module is very rarely within spec. c't tests memory occasionally, and the results are pretty much universally abysmal.
If there is a toaster shortage, you can build a new factory pretty rapidly. Not so with chips. With cars, demand is pretty steady and factories are rarely used to capacity. If you have a chip factory which is not used to capacity, producing an extra chip is very cheap, so it is a waste to not produce as many as you can. On the other hand, producing an extra car is rather expensive even when the factory is otherwise idle -- so idle capacity doesn't push car prices down to unsustainable levels.
It doesn't do much good for Free Software, but that wasn't the intention anyway.
It also needs better Terms of Service. Listening in on private conversations is unacceptable for me.
I really don't care about Sun's or IBM's or Microsoft's bottom line. I want Java because I see Mono as an unacceptable risk. Sun is doomed anyway, open source Java won't change that one way or the other.
An asteroid which was brought into Earth orbit would necessarily have a very low speed relative to Earth. Therefore it would be much less destructive if it hit. Still nasty of course, depending on the size, but there are lots of dangerous things on Earth already.
Sure you will. I really hate the way the Java package drops crap where it doesn't belong in the file system, but ok, I can download it too. However, asking some random person to download some batch script that turns into an RPM which must then be installed really is too much. This kind of trouble ensures that Java stays firmly on the server.
I don't particularly mind that Java stays on the server; I can't really see the benefits of not compiling code to binary. At least not if you don't go all the way to a language like Scheme/LISP. However, others can, and that will bring the .NET VM to the Linux desktop. Despite Miguel de Icaza's assurances, I find that highly risky, and I would prefer that it didn't happen. Java could help keep .NET at bay, but it needs to be Free Software for that to happen. I hope that GCJ will solve the problem, or that Parrot makes both .NET and Java irrelevant on the Linux desktop.
That is, by the way, much like the current situation. If you want to make a Java program and you want to distribute it on Linux, you better make sure that it works with GCJ. A very good open source JVM would instantly kill off lesser JVM's like kaffe and reduce the horrible fragmentation that Java suffers from right now.
Shipping Java with a Linux distro would make it possible to run Java programs not delivered with the distro. It would be hard to argue that this would not be the purpose of including Java. And even if it was the sole purpose of including Java, what good would it do to have a Java included when you have to download another one to be able to run, say, Java applets?
Read the GPL, it answers your question.
When it comes to x86, the most relevant benchmarks are based on shrinkwrapped software.