And how technologically accessible is it to actually put something on the moon that would be worth building this? Look at the speed the Space Station is progressing with. Heck, even lifting materials and machine-power to assemble the elevator there would be a lot.
We might actually be closer to building the elevatorhere than to establishing any sort of moon base in terms of technology. Not to mention that a working space elevator on earth would make the Moon a hell of a lot more accessible.
Effect \Ef*fect"\, v. t. [imp. & p. p. Effected; p. pr. & vb. n. Effecting.]
1. To produce, as a cause or agent; to cause to be.
2. To bring to pass; to execute; to enforce; to achieve; to accomplish.
So no, they didn't enforce piracy. Or produce it - not yet, anyway. They will effect HL2 piracy if Steam burdens the users too much, eventually.
1. "indemnify" does not mean "you cannot be sued". Only "we'll pay you the damages if you get sued" 2. the indemnification move is a recent anouncement, the EULA only says "not exceeding the software cost" and "MS is not liable" (HA!) - and all you have to show for it is a website, at most (not really legally binding, eh?) Reading the conditions, it's not exactly guaranteed, either, that MS will deign to step in. Plus, even if they do, you need to completely hand over the defense to them, which could have interesting side effects, such as exposing your internal documents to MS
So how is it "better" again? say you get served a suit and MS does step in, but fails to settle and you get an interim restraint order for using a particular component of a particular server-side MS product... which happens to be critical to your business. Is MS willing to pay for the operating losses that will produce? or even for the PR effects of such a suit on your business? no, it only says
For any covered software, we will:
defend you against any claims made by an unaffiliated third party that the covered software infringes its patent, copyright, or trademark or misappropriates its trade secret, and
pay the amount of any resulting adverse final judgment against you (after any appeals) or settlement to which we consent.
And also:
You must notify us promptly in writing of the claim. You also must give us sole control over its defense or settlement. You agree to provide us with reasonable assistance in defending the claim. We will reimburse you for reasonable out-of-pocket expenses that you incur in providing that assistance. The claim might fall outside the scope of our commitment, but send it to us anyway. We may choose to treat it as if it were covered by this commitment.
Great, eh? wait, there's more:
Our obligations will not apply to the extent that the claim or adverse final judgment is based on:
(i) your running of the covered software after we notify you to discontinue running due to such a claim; (ii) the combination of the covered software with a non-Microsoft product, data, or business process; (iii) damages attributable to the value of the use of a non-Microsoft product, data, or business process; (iv) your altering the covered software; (v) your distribution of the covered software to, or its use for the benefit of, any third party; (vi) your use of our trademark(s) without express written consent to do so; or (vii) for any trade secret claim, your acquiring a trade secret (a) through improper means; (b) under circumstances giving rise to a duty to maintain its secrecy or limit its use; or (c) from a person (other than us or our affiliates) who owed to the party asserting the claim a duty to maintain the secrecy or limit the use of the trade secret.
And more!:
If we receive information about an infringement claim related to covered software, we may do any of the following, at our expense and without obligation to do so:
procure the right to continue its use; or
replace it with a functional equivalent, or modify it to make it non-infringing (including disabling the challenged functionality). If we do that, you will stop running the allegedly infringing software immediately.
If, as a result of an infringement claim, a court of competent jurisdiction enjoins your use of covered software, we will do one of the following, at our option:
procure the right to continue its use,
replace it with a functional equivalent,
modify it to make it non-infringing (including disabling the challenged functionality), or
How many service providers you use digitally sign their mails to you? Does your bank do it? yes, it's a moot question now, as they don't use DomainKeys either, but since DomainKeys make for a more transparent scheme (just try to get the PR guy to revoke a PGP key) it would be a lot easier switch to.
Well, it wasn't. Marx's world was rather utopic, true; but the hard dogma of the Soviet-style communism was not really all that connected to it (*). It was simply a system by which those who got the power would keep it. It happens in other political regimes, too, just under a different guise. The matter of trusting your government is still open throughout the world, be it democratic or not - the natural outcome is a structure that is interested in its own survival first. This is not even restricted to politics, bureaucracy comes to mind too.
(*) other than use socialist ideas in the beginning in order to enlist the support of intellectuals who later got murdered - thinking people would have been dangerous. Remember Trotsky?
Since all this discussion is pretty armchair-like, it doesn't really matter one's attitude anyway. If things happen to go bad for the Iraqis, your condemning, mine, heck, the whole/.'s will be as useless as the attempt to balance the view now. But, as we're trading opinions, mine was that it's a little interesting that seed IP is so high up on the list of things needed for Iraq's reconstruction. While I didn't expect the Biblical parable of fishes and bread, this does send a strange, trojan horse-like message - especially in the context that the country's destruction actually occurred.
Of course, Iraq will be free to ban or restrict the actual import or use of GMO seeds. It will depend on whether the new regime will be more willing to look after the citizen's interest than the old one or not. I would be rather skeptical though, as totalitarian governments tends to breed corruption a lot, and the current situation will only let it flourish freely.
Yes, humanity ran Marx's experiment. Too bad it failed.
You're making the common, albeit mistaken, assumption that what happened in the Communist block was Marx's experiment. Not true. Marx's ideology was used more like a pretext in the beginning. It was Lenin's experiment and Stalin brought it to 'greatness'.
They used to call it "Marxism-Leninism" but it was Lenin's picture that hang on walls. Then they changed it for Stalin's.
Oh, he's not going to be able to show you that. But he doesn't have to, either. When one effectively has control of a country, one can... umm... 'persuade' local seed shops (by bribery or threat, if needs be) to sell one's seeds. You don't even have to start on a country-wide scale from the beginning. Arm-twisting small local producers is a habit for some corporations - and is usually quite well swept under the rug. They were given a finger, you think they'll stop if they can take the whole hand, and more? And what happens if they manage to force at least some regions of the country to have for sale only GMO seeds?
You might be high-minded about the whole thing, but historically speaking this type of attitude is the exception. So, while I hope you're right, I fear the chances are rather low.
Of course, the serious problem with that, is that you can't use the browser from within the KDE file dialog, so you would have to open a seperate browser, find your URL, then copy and paste it into the file dialog box, if you don't know the URL from memory of what you're trying to read.
What are you talking about? I can do "fish://ssh_alias_for_some_server"[*] in the directory edit field, press Enter, get a nice dialog for password, browse to the file I need in the Open dialog and open it.
[*] ssh host alias specified in.ssh/config - how's that for user-friendly browsing?
On the off-chance that the parent is not a willing troll, here's some additional info on one of those - Newham. No "reverse course" there (the OSS consultant suggested a mixed upgrade, not a full OSS migration) They used the OSS trials as baragaining chip to get the Windows deployment price down:
Netproject's Eddie Bleasdale says his consultancy was used as a negotiating tool to get a better deal out of Microsoft. He argues that the council never really intended to deploy an open source solution at all - because it doesn't have the expertise to do so.
Link. To follow more of the story, search for Newham on the Register.
yeah, and the report of the consultant that favored Windows (Cap Gemini) turned out to have been funded by Microsoft. Surprised?
At less than an eighth of the price of a Sun workstation, you can purchase a dual 2.5GHz G5
$8,695.00 for this dual Opteron Sun w2100z. Please, point me to this amazing deal that gives you dual 2.5GHz G5's for about $1000. And with comparable specs would be nice - like 4G ECC RAM, Quadro-class video and so on.
For any role I can imagine for a dual Opteron workstation, I can see a G5 in the same role for a considerably cheaper price.
Yeah, you're trolling, I know. But here's a question: do you know what the (listed for the Sun w2100z) GeForce Quadro FX3000 is used for? Did you ever see a G5-powered station used for the same purpose? (hint: look at the video cards Apple puts in the top-of-the-line G5)
Opteron SSE2 is slower than its FPU, SSE is only 64-bits, doesn't support double precision floating point...
Dude, lay off the crack! Really, now, why do I even bother? You obviously think x86 is still back in the PentiumPro era or something like that. Get your 'facts' straight.
The sad thing is, you could have actually made a point here. AltiVec is definitely better implemented than SSE2/3... if only AMD would wake up to doing to SIMD the same parallelization they pulled with FPU on Athlons! I have little hope in Intel for that, as they have Itanium in mind as the FPU racehorse.
and please tell me what nvidia or ATI card handles 4 head.
this one does (this particular page had specs, google for quadro4 400 nvs pci). A little old and hard to find, though, as this is not nVidia's hottest market.
He does actually have it right. "Laws" are in fact "empirical laws" that are observed to be true in most cases (all cases initially, sometimes experimental refinement shows exceptions[*]). "Theories" are models that have to be able to explain at least the behavior stated by the "laws" (and explain exceptions if they are observed). Take Ohm's law and the theory of transport in metals; Snell's law and the theory of electromagnetism; energy/momentum conservation laws and analytical mechanics (and, from there, quantum mechanics, relativity); Thermodynamics laws and Statistical Mechanics (just to re-list his examples). Laws state the "how"; theories are for the "why".
[*] As laws admit exceptions, they are definitely not "axioms". They just state that, under certain circumstances, a certain behavior is observed, which might not occur under different circumstances. Example: Coulomb's law breaks down at extremely small distances.
You're trying to say they could have overestimated the performance by almost 100%? Coming from the people that actually built what was until recently the fastest supercomputer, that's extremely doubtful.
Also, the performance per-CPU and per-node is most likely real data, as they say the SX-8 would ship in December.
And do you personally audit the security of every online vendor you buy from to see that they're all up-to-date with patches? what about unpatched vulnerabilities? zero-day exploits? or heck, even loaded ATMs, as the required tech gets better, smaller and harder to spot?
Bottom-line, if it were all under your control, then you might reasonably want to assume responsability for it. But this is not the case - and all you need is for one of the points of failure to give in. Are you willing to risk it?
You see, unlike Microsoft, Gnome is free (and Free).
I highly doubt the time he spent upgrading all the users' desktops was 'free' for his company. You see, it's not always about up-front costs when you're not a hobbyist user. If Gnome does not Just Work, then it's definitely Not Free for entreprise customers. And this kind of flies in the face of the "Gnome is more professional" ranters. NBot to mention that it doesn't help at all with the OSS software adoption on the entreprise desktop.
GCC 3.3.4 and glibc 2.3.3 provide best performance for a Linux distribution to date.
Huh? the latest gcc is 3.4.2 (a month old), but the 3.4 series have been out for a while now (since April) - and with improvements on... uh, say C++ side, as it would pertain to KDE. Andit's in use, too - MDK10.1 uses 3.4.1. So how is 3.3.4 going to give "best performance" in November???
No, he's actually a master at giving you the impression of understanding. No offense - with the scarce funding that's going into String Theory right now, it's a necessary skill.
Just because he paints a picture it doesn't imply one understands its meaning.
After the collision, the photons each have unit spin and so the net spin is either zero or two, depending on whether the spins are opposite or aligned respectively.
Erm... no.
To nitpick on your nitpick - adding 2 spins of magnitude 1 can give a total angular momentum of 0, 1 or 2. Thus 2 photons would do just fine for all cases.
Of course, you can have more - but the process cross-section would be a lot smaller (short argument, phase-space volume difference) Thus, most of the time you only get 2 photons.
That's already happening - why do you think they are resorting to patent litigation? because their 'traditional' products aren't faring that well these days. But, by all means, let the trend pick up speed!
Personally, I avoid Kodak processing like the plague. They give the photos a sick yellowish tint, particularly annoying for outdoors pictures that have lots of blue. But maybe it's just the chemicals they use around here.
Insofar as I may be heard by anything, which may or may not care what I say, I ask, if it matters, that you be blessed for sneezing. Conversely, if not blessing but something else may be required to insure any possible benefit for which you may be eligible after sneezing, I ask that this, whatever it may be, be granted or withheld, as the case may be, in such a manner as to insure your receiving said benefit."
Slashdot Mirror
And how technologically accessible is it to actually put something on the moon that would be worth building this? Look at the speed the Space Station is progressing with. Heck, even lifting materials and machine-power to assemble the elevator there would be a lot.
We might actually be closer to building the elevatorhere than to establishing any sort of moon base in terms of technology. Not to mention that a working space elevator on earth would make the Moon a hell of a lot more accessible.
Quoth Webster:
So no, they didn't enforce piracy. Or produce it - not yet, anyway. They will effect HL2 piracy if Steam burdens the users too much, eventually.
1. "indemnify" does not mean "you cannot be sued". Only "we'll pay you the damages if you get sued"
2. the indemnification move is a recent anouncement, the EULA only says "not exceeding the software cost" and "MS is not liable" (HA!) - and all you have to show for it is a website, at most (not really legally binding, eh?) Reading the conditions, it's not exactly guaranteed, either, that MS will deign to step in. Plus, even if they do, you need to completely hand over the defense to them, which could have interesting side effects, such as exposing your internal documents to MS
So how is it "better" again? say you get served a suit and MS does step in, but fails to settle and you get an interim restraint order for using a particular component of a particular server-side MS product
And also:
Great, eh? wait, there's more:
And more!:
How many service providers you use digitally sign their mails to you? Does your bank do it? yes, it's a moot question now, as they don't use DomainKeys either, but since DomainKeys make for a more transparent scheme (just try to get the PR guy to revoke a PGP key) it would be a lot easier switch to.
Well, it wasn't. Marx's world was rather utopic, true; but the hard dogma of the Soviet-style communism was not really all that connected to it (*). It was simply a system by which those who got the power would keep it. It happens in other political regimes, too, just under a different guise. The matter of trusting your government is still open throughout the world, be it democratic or not - the natural outcome is a structure that is interested in its own survival first. This is not even restricted to politics, bureaucracy comes to mind too.
(*) other than use socialist ideas in the beginning in order to enlist the support of intellectuals who later got murdered - thinking people would have been dangerous. Remember Trotsky?
Since all this discussion is pretty armchair-like, it doesn't really matter one's attitude anyway. If things happen to go bad for the Iraqis, your condemning, mine, heck, the whole /.'s will be as useless as the attempt to balance the view now. But, as we're trading opinions, mine was that it's a little interesting that seed IP is so high up on the list of things needed for Iraq's reconstruction. While I didn't expect the Biblical parable of fishes and bread, this does send a strange, trojan horse-like message - especially in the context that the country's destruction actually occurred.
Of course, Iraq will be free to ban or restrict the actual import or use of GMO seeds. It will depend on whether the new regime will be more willing to look after the citizen's interest than the old one or not. I would be rather skeptical though, as totalitarian governments tends to breed corruption a lot, and the current situation will only let it flourish freely.
Yes, humanity ran Marx's experiment. Too bad it failed.
You're making the common, albeit mistaken, assumption that what happened in the Communist block was Marx's experiment. Not true. Marx's ideology was used more like a pretext in the beginning. It was Lenin's experiment and Stalin brought it to 'greatness'.
They used to call it "Marxism-Leninism" but it was Lenin's picture that hang on walls. Then they changed it for Stalin's.
Oh, he's not going to be able to show you that. But he doesn't have to, either. When one effectively has control of a country, one can ... umm ... 'persuade' local seed shops (by bribery or threat, if needs be) to sell one's seeds. You don't even have to start on a country-wide scale from the beginning. Arm-twisting small local producers is a habit for some corporations - and is usually quite well swept under the rug. They were given a finger, you think they'll stop if they can take the whole hand, and more? And what happens if they manage to force at least some regions of the country to have for sale only GMO seeds?
You might be high-minded about the whole thing, but historically speaking this type of attitude is the exception. So, while I hope you're right, I fear the chances are rather low.
Yeah, you're safe. Sure. Safe as in the Microsoft-Timeline patent spat over SQL Server?
What are you talking about? I can do "fish://ssh_alias_for_some_server"[*] in the directory edit field, press Enter, get a nice dialog for password, browse to the file I need in the Open dialog and open it.
[*] ssh host alias specified in
Link. To follow more of the story, search for Newham on the Register.
yeah, and the report of the consultant that favored Windows (Cap Gemini) turned out to have been funded by Microsoft. Surprised?
At less than an eighth of the price of a Sun workstation, you can purchase a dual 2.5GHz G5
...
... if only AMD would wake up to doing to SIMD the same parallelization they pulled with FPU on Athlons! I have little hope in Intel for that, as they have Itanium in mind as the FPU racehorse.
$8,695.00 for this dual Opteron Sun w2100z. Please, point me to this amazing deal that gives you dual 2.5GHz G5's for about $1000. And with comparable specs would be nice - like 4G ECC RAM, Quadro-class video and so on.
For any role I can imagine for a dual Opteron workstation, I can see a G5 in the same role for a considerably cheaper price.
Yeah, you're trolling, I know. But here's a question: do you know what the (listed for the Sun w2100z) GeForce Quadro FX3000 is used for? Did you ever see a G5-powered station used for the same purpose? (hint: look at the video cards Apple puts in the top-of-the-line G5)
Opteron SSE2 is slower than its FPU, SSE is only 64-bits, doesn't support double precision floating point
Dude, lay off the crack! Really, now, why do I even bother? You obviously think x86 is still back in the PentiumPro era or something like that. Get your 'facts' straight.
The sad thing is, you could have actually made a point here. AltiVec is definitely better implemented than SSE2/3
I think he meant this:
>ls -hs mozilla-firefox-bin
72K mozilla-firefox-bin*
and please tell me what nvidia or ATI card handles 4 head.
this one does (this particular page had specs, google for quadro4 400 nvs pci). A little old and hard to find, though, as this is not nVidia's hottest market.
He does actually have it right. "Laws" are in fact "empirical laws" that are observed to be true in most cases (all cases initially, sometimes experimental refinement shows exceptions[*]). "Theories" are models that have to be able to explain at least the behavior stated by the "laws" (and explain exceptions if they are observed). Take Ohm's law and the theory of transport in metals; Snell's law and the theory of electromagnetism; energy/momentum conservation laws and analytical mechanics (and, from there, quantum mechanics, relativity); Thermodynamics laws and Statistical Mechanics (just to re-list his examples). Laws state the "how"; theories are for the "why".
[*] As laws admit exceptions, they are definitely not "axioms". They just state that, under certain circumstances, a certain behavior is observed, which might not occur under different circumstances. Example: Coulomb's law breaks down at extremely small distances.
You're trying to say they could have overestimated the performance by almost 100%? Coming from the people that actually built what was until recently the fastest supercomputer, that's extremely doubtful.
Also, the performance per-CPU and per-node is most likely real data, as they say the SX-8 would ship in December.
And do you personally audit the security of every online vendor you buy from to see that they're all up-to-date with patches? what about unpatched vulnerabilities? zero-day exploits? or heck, even loaded ATMs, as the required tech gets better, smaller and harder to spot?
Bottom-line, if it were all under your control, then you might reasonably want to assume responsability for it. But this is not the case - and all you need is for one of the points of failure to give in. Are you willing to risk it?
You see, unlike Microsoft, Gnome is free (and Free).
I highly doubt the time he spent upgrading all the users' desktops was 'free' for his company. You see, it's not always about up-front costs when you're not a hobbyist user. If Gnome does not Just Work, then it's definitely Not Free for entreprise customers. And this kind of flies in the face of the "Gnome is more professional" ranters. NBot to mention that it doesn't help at all with the OSS software adoption on the entreprise desktop.
Huh? the latest gcc is 3.4.2 (a month old), but the 3.4 series have been out for a while now (since April) - and with improvements on
No, he's actually a master at giving you the impression of understanding. No offense - with the scarce funding that's going into String Theory right now, it's a necessary skill.
Just because he paints a picture it doesn't imply one understands its meaning.
And several conservation laws of physics, as well. :)
That's ok, CP violation has already been observed.
After the collision, the photons each have unit spin and so the net spin is either zero or two, depending on whether the spins are opposite or aligned respectively.
... no.
Erm
To nitpick on your nitpick - adding 2 spins of magnitude 1 can give a total angular momentum of 0, 1 or 2. Thus 2 photons would do just fine for all cases.
Of course, you can have more - but the process cross-section would be a lot smaller (short argument, phase-space volume difference) Thus, most of the time you only get 2 photons.
That's already happening - why do you think they are resorting to patent litigation? because their 'traditional' products aren't faring that well these days. But, by all means, let the trend pick up speed!
Personally, I avoid Kodak processing like the plague. They give the photos a sick yellowish tint, particularly annoying for outdoors pictures that have lots of blue. But maybe it's just the chemicals they use around here.
(with due acknowledgement to the late R. Zelazny)
I know, everyone's a critic :) but your is still not 'short' enough for a Haiku. How about:
Open Source,
Closed Source,
Bits on my disks.