It's worse because you can distribute far more copies online, far more quickly, than you can physically distribute. That is the basis for the absurd award.
The EFF is not there to fight spam. It has nothing to do with their mission. That's like a gun owner refusing to donate to the NRA because of they don't do anything to stop spam.
Bottom line: if they allow tethering, consumption goes up sharply for a significant group of consumers.
Then just charge people for a tethering plan instead of banning tethering. DUH!
This is soooooooo lame I can't stand it. If tethering uses more bandwidth, then I'll pay for it. I'm not trying to get something for free! I'm a business user, and it would be a business expense, so that's fine. But instead they ban it entirely - so I have to buy a separate card + a whole separate data plan with a separate bill. That makes no sense.
There's lots of independent artists offering their music online for a reasonable price. Same thing with video games, and source code. Some of these people quit their day job and put their own time and money into creating these works. Then I hear some "Stick it to the man: information wants to be free!" guy pirating this stuff. The reality is that most of these people aren't venerable, they just want stuff for free.
Fortunately, we have been conserving them and switching to NAT so the problem has lessened. The industry isn't crying wolf. Also, if you live in the US, then you have less of a problem than in a developing nation who didn't get a great big block allocated to them.
But if you want your cell phone, computer, XBOX, and refrigerator to have a unique IP address, then this is necessary. Of course, you probably DON'T want that, but well... that's another discussion.:-)
Nintendo DS lite: $99 street price ($129 list).
iPhone: $99 - $400 + 2 year contract + give your social security number to AT&T to get a credit check.
An iPhone is not attanable by a 12 year old mowing lawns.
Run for office, on a platform of stopping big brother. You don't need to win, you just need to be noticed.
The problem is that it is one thing for a concerned citizen to write their congressman and vote; but it takes someone who is really one in a million to run for office -- and it usually falls to the ambitious ones, not the righteous ones.
The practice of using different numbers of gene sequences is common: the same thing happens if you get an HIV test, or an HPV test, or FLU, or whatever. In that case though, the FDA regulates it to prove that the result is clinically valid. I'm not sure what involvement the FDA has in this.
You should read this month's Scientific American cover story "The Top 10 myths about Sustainability", which discusses why the sustainable approaches do not lower the standard of living.
This is a point that always seemed obvious to me: investing in technology never lowers anyone's standard of living. The only reason it seems otherwise is because the proponents of such arguments ignore things like choking on car exhaust in their standard of living calculations, but make sure to point out that they will have to downgrade to a 43" TV from a 52" to save power. Nevermind the fact that it pays off the long term.
I thought the idea of kicking out a dictatorship and allowing a democracy to flourish was a good idea.
Yeah... that rarely works. You can't forceably make a democracy from the outside. A country has a dictatorship for a reason: when fear is the only path to stability. This is understandable in places where there are major social problems such as ethnic or religious strife combined with low standards of living. A dictatorship achieves stability at the cost of freedom.
A better idea might be to work with the dictator to improve the standard of living. Bring in education and technology in exchange for diminishing the brainwashing. Once the society rises to a standard of living where they are enlightened enough to live in peace, under the rule of law instead of the rule of the fear, then democracy can begin.
Ironically, the idea of invading other countries for humanitarian reasons is a very leftist concept. And one that George Bush denied during his bid for the presidential election. He said something like "If we'd just leave people alone, they might not hate us so much. We should stay out of their business." But the warhawks flipped his opinion 180 degrees, and the "conservatives" followed them. To this day, I am amazed when I hear American Republicans support the war. It is the exact opposite of their platform, but they blindly follow it even against their own philosophy.
If the people of Iran want to get rid of their government, they can do it themselves.
If they want help, I could understand the UN deciding to assist them. That is similar to what happened in Afghanistan - the UN forces assisted the Northern Alliance against the Taliban. But that is different from ousting the dictator without having been asked to assist.
code reviews take forever and tend to reveal less than good UI-level testing would
WOW. Just WOW. You must be doing a numer of things incorrectly. Let me offer some suggestions:
(Although, UI testing is definitely a pre-requisite here, and nothing will find more bugs than just using the software.)
1) Everyone must read and understand the code before the review.
2) Allocate time in the schedule for code reviews.
3)
4) No bosses, managers, testers, or other non-coding positions in the review.
5) Do not read the code line-by-line or even function-by-function.
Everyone should have the code marked-up with comments and questions prior to the meeting. The goal of the meeting is to go through those, not to go through the code itself.
The meeting should start with:
"Author: Has everyone read the code?" If there are any "No's" then dismiss the meeting and those people can read the code during the time allocated for the meeting.
"Author: Are there any major design, or module-level questions or comments?" This is the time to address major items like using the wrong tools, libraries, etc. (Although in theory, those were caught during a design phase, but it can happen)
Now, go through the comments and questions. Or go function-by-function if you can. Maybe with "This function does X: Any comments or questions? Next. This function does Y..."
At this rate, you should be able to review weeks of code in an hour.
I think Java applets seem to perform better now because processors are faster, and because people are comparing it to Flash/.NET/Javascript, not to C++. For example, the JVM took forever to load, but I don't think the JVM is any bigger than the.NET framework. Java was just ahead of its time and hardware caught up.
A wind turbine at sea would surely cost more than a land-based one.
Is that true per kilowatt-hour? Seems to me that ones on sea should get more wind, more consistently. Is that not enough to offset the increased costs?
Those a good standards. But none of those things should be in a constitution. Perhaps something simpler like "the right to open access to government documents" could be in a constitution.
Why is it that no one is paying attention to the fact that he was breaking into the school computer system and changing grades? Should that not have been the police's main concern? Isn't that a significantly bigger crime than the others? Shouldn't the school have been interested in this?
"Hello Police, I saw this guy loitering in front of the supermarket. Oh, and he was also killing dozens of people with a machine gun."
"Thank you sir, we'll get right on that loitering thing."
I can't wait until they do something like this. Someone will sue the studio, forcing them to re-release the disc without the revocation list, effectively crippling the DRM for violating fair use rights. That will be a wonderful day. In my dreamworld, the DOJ follows-up with an investigation for antitrust violations and includes all the other MPAA/RIAA members.
Exercise is like sex, when you're doing it your body is spewing dopamine, endorphins, and bodily fluids in all directions. If you're doing it right, it feels great.
I can't debate the physiology of this, but I don't think the effect is universal. I have friends who love to lift weights, and others who love to run. I hate both: The only thing it makes me feel is tired and hungry. I've hear them wax poetically about loving "the burn" or "the runners high" and I've gone with them, and never felt it.
However, I love to play DDR and Ultimate Frisbee. I could play any of those until my body can't take any more - and then I keep going. It is not the physical activity alone that makes it fun - it is the mental challenge. I can only assume that people are just wired-up differently.
How many years has it been? By now, all the actors will be older and they won't look the part. It will be worse than Harry Potter or Bill and Ted's Bogus Journey.
In America, it is cool to get bad grades. I guess this means that if kids realize that hard work==success==money, that they do better.
Now, how can we use this to eliminate the counterculture where it is good to be stupid? When the kids stop getting paid, do they drop down to their original performance levels? How much do they need to be paid in order to perform better? We need a lifelong study of these kids to see what impact this had.
39.6 percentage points higher than last year, when the kids were in third grade.
Does this mean that kids are 39.6% smarter than we thought they were? They just needed a reason to show it?
Slashdot Mirror
That won't fix the problem.
It's worse because you can distribute far more copies online, far more quickly, than you can physically distribute. That is the basis for the absurd award.
The EFF is not there to fight spam. It has nothing to do with their mission. That's like a gun owner refusing to donate to the NRA because of they don't do anything to stop spam.
Bottom line: if they allow tethering, consumption goes up sharply for a significant group of consumers.
Then just charge people for a tethering plan instead of banning tethering. DUH!
This is soooooooo lame I can't stand it. If tethering uses more bandwidth, then I'll pay for it. I'm not trying to get something for free! I'm a business user, and it would be a business expense, so that's fine. But instead they ban it entirely - so I have to buy a separate card + a whole separate data plan with a separate bill. That makes no sense.
There's lots of independent artists offering their music online for a reasonable price. Same thing with video games, and source code. Some of these people quit their day job and put their own time and money into creating these works. Then I hear some "Stick it to the man: information wants to be free!" guy pirating this stuff. The reality is that most of these people aren't venerable, they just want stuff for free.
Never again will opera, football, and computers come together so succinctly.
Fortunately, we have been conserving them and switching to NAT so the problem has lessened. The industry isn't crying wolf. Also, if you live in the US, then you have less of a problem than in a developing nation who didn't get a great big block allocated to them.
But if you want your cell phone, computer, XBOX, and refrigerator to have a unique IP address, then this is necessary. Of course, you probably DON'T want that, but well... that's another discussion. :-)
Nope. I'm talking about PCR assays.
Nintendo DS lite: $99 street price ($129 list). iPhone: $99 - $400 + 2 year contract + give your social security number to AT&T to get a credit check. An iPhone is not attanable by a 12 year old mowing lawns.
Run for office, on a platform of stopping big brother. You don't need to win, you just need to be noticed. The problem is that it is one thing for a concerned citizen to write their congressman and vote; but it takes someone who is really one in a million to run for office -- and it usually falls to the ambitious ones, not the righteous ones.
The practice of using different numbers of gene sequences is common: the same thing happens if you get an HIV test, or an HPV test, or FLU, or whatever. In that case though, the FDA regulates it to prove that the result is clinically valid. I'm not sure what involvement the FDA has in this.
You should read this month's Scientific American cover story "The Top 10 myths about Sustainability", which discusses why the sustainable approaches do not lower the standard of living.
This is a point that always seemed obvious to me: investing in technology never lowers anyone's standard of living. The only reason it seems otherwise is because the proponents of such arguments ignore things like choking on car exhaust in their standard of living calculations, but make sure to point out that they will have to downgrade to a 43" TV from a 52" to save power. Nevermind the fact that it pays off the long term.
Yes: NATO, not UN. Thanks for the correction, albeit a cynical one.
I thought the idea of kicking out a dictatorship and allowing a democracy to flourish was a good idea.
Yeah... that rarely works. You can't forceably make a democracy from the outside. A country has a dictatorship for a reason: when fear is the only path to stability. This is understandable in places where there are major social problems such as ethnic or religious strife combined with low standards of living. A dictatorship achieves stability at the cost of freedom.
A better idea might be to work with the dictator to improve the standard of living. Bring in education and technology in exchange for diminishing the brainwashing. Once the society rises to a standard of living where they are enlightened enough to live in peace, under the rule of law instead of the rule of the fear, then democracy can begin.
Ironically, the idea of invading other countries for humanitarian reasons is a very leftist concept. And one that George Bush denied during his bid for the presidential election. He said something like "If we'd just leave people alone, they might not hate us so much. We should stay out of their business." But the warhawks flipped his opinion 180 degrees, and the "conservatives" followed them. To this day, I am amazed when I hear American Republicans support the war. It is the exact opposite of their platform, but they blindly follow it even against their own philosophy.
If the people of Iran want to get rid of their government, they can do it themselves.
If they want help, I could understand the UN deciding to assist them. That is similar to what happened in Afghanistan - the UN forces assisted the Northern Alliance against the Taliban. But that is different from ousting the dictator without having been asked to assist.
code reviews take forever and tend to reveal less than good UI-level testing would
WOW. Just WOW. You must be doing a numer of things incorrectly. Let me offer some suggestions: (Although, UI testing is definitely a pre-requisite here, and nothing will find more bugs than just using the software.)
1) Everyone must read and understand the code before the review.
2) Allocate time in the schedule for code reviews.
3) 4) No bosses, managers, testers, or other non-coding positions in the review.
5) Do not read the code line-by-line or even function-by-function.
Everyone should have the code marked-up with comments and questions prior to the meeting. The goal of the meeting is to go through those, not to go through the code itself. The meeting should start with: "Author: Has everyone read the code?" If there are any "No's" then dismiss the meeting and those people can read the code during the time allocated for the meeting. "Author: Are there any major design, or module-level questions or comments?" This is the time to address major items like using the wrong tools, libraries, etc. (Although in theory, those were caught during a design phase, but it can happen) Now, go through the comments and questions. Or go function-by-function if you can. Maybe with "This function does X: Any comments or questions? Next. This function does Y..."
At this rate, you should be able to review weeks of code in an hour.
I think Java applets seem to perform better now because processors are faster, and because people are comparing it to Flash/.NET/Javascript, not to C++. For example, the JVM took forever to load, but I don't think the JVM is any bigger than the .NET framework. Java was just ahead of its time and hardware caught up.
A wind turbine at sea would surely cost more than a land-based one.
Is that true per kilowatt-hour? Seems to me that ones on sea should get more wind, more consistently. Is that not enough to offset the increased costs?
Those a good standards. But none of those things should be in a constitution. Perhaps something simpler like "the right to open access to government documents" could be in a constitution.
Why is it that no one is paying attention to the fact that he was breaking into the school computer system and changing grades? Should that not have been the police's main concern? Isn't that a significantly bigger crime than the others? Shouldn't the school have been interested in this? "Hello Police, I saw this guy loitering in front of the supermarket. Oh, and he was also killing dozens of people with a machine gun." "Thank you sir, we'll get right on that loitering thing."
I can't wait until they do something like this. Someone will sue the studio, forcing them to re-release the disc without the revocation list, effectively crippling the DRM for violating fair use rights. That will be a wonderful day. In my dreamworld, the DOJ follows-up with an investigation for antitrust violations and includes all the other MPAA/RIAA members.
Exercise is like sex, when you're doing it your body is spewing dopamine, endorphins, and bodily fluids in all directions. If you're doing it right, it feels great.
I can't debate the physiology of this, but I don't think the effect is universal. I have friends who love to lift weights, and others who love to run. I hate both: The only thing it makes me feel is tired and hungry. I've hear them wax poetically about loving "the burn" or "the runners high" and I've gone with them, and never felt it.
However, I love to play DDR and Ultimate Frisbee. I could play any of those until my body can't take any more - and then I keep going. It is not the physical activity alone that makes it fun - it is the mental challenge. I can only assume that people are just wired-up differently.
If Google gets an exclusive right to digitize books from the Author's Guild, then they effectively become a monopoly.
As others have posted, this is a fundamental problem with the ODF format, so all implementations will have this problem.
How many years has it been? By now, all the actors will be older and they won't look the part. It will be worse than Harry Potter or Bill and Ted's Bogus Journey.
39.6 percentage points higher than last year, when the kids were in third grade.
Does this mean that kids are 39.6% smarter than we thought they were? They just needed a reason to show it?