This is the truth. There are many many many companies who have been issued HUGE blocks that they don't and can not possibly use. If all the WASTED blocks were recouvered, IPv4 would not be nearly as close as it (not really) is to being "full".
Oh good grief. You don't use Office-like tools in a professional setting, do you? Otherwise you would not make such absurd comments. The facts are that Excel and Excel macro capabilities are one of the main reasons that businesses use the Office suite. And, OO (like with GIMP and Photoshop) simply does *NOT* measure up. Yet.
It's *NOT* about being a Microsoft "shill", it's a matter of being realistic and understanding that the Open Office product doesn't *YET* measure up in terms of professional standards and needs, what people that use such products in a serious business setting need.
This is an anecdote that expired a few years ago. I do not believe that there are very many people at all that still believe this. Indeed, it's *ALL OVER* the news about how very little of people's "on-line" life is private.
I'm sorry, what crime are you talking about? The border guards did nothing illegal as far as the GDR law is concerned, since they were military personnel whose service consisted of preventing people to escape by any means necessary.
Putting them on a FRG trial many years afterwards is simply pure nonsense to satisfy crazy mobs. FRG law didn't apply in that region back then.
So, you have no problems with the gassing of Jews in the camps, either?
This could be glossing over quite a bit of useful work for Oracles customers.
Dude, get with the program. Oracle is up there with Microsoft in the Slashdot-Hate department. If a "story" can be slanted against them, we go all the way...
Microsoft and their associated Windows shills are loving this. Fortunately, I'm not rich enough to afford 64bit hardware, but still this is not good...
He goes all his life with nothing more serious than a hacking charge. Then, a few weeks after antagonising a powerful country, he's accused of rape.
Clearly, opportunity did not become realistic until recently, when he lost his virginity to one of these young ladies. Then he went ape-shit crazy to try everything he had seen in his formidable pornography collection.
The issue of his ungentlemanly behavior with these two ladies has not yet been resolved. While Julian Assange continues to make suggestions of a "smear", in actuality there is no evidence of any such thing. In fact, one of his accusers is a long-time Wikileaks supporter.
It *IS* relevant to consider "smear" campaigns and watch for them, but just because Assange is involved in a "noble cause" doesn't mean he isn't a creep with the ladies. Many males in his position would become susceptible to ego bloat, and geeks are well know to covet their porn. Who is to say if things didn't get away from Assange?
The website at steflewandowski.com contains elements from the site inlovebot.com, which appears to host malware - software that can hurt your computer or otherwise operate without your consent. Just visiting a site that contains malware can infect your computer.
If it's just a matter of the names of operatives, that's one thing. To a point, I'm OK with that. But if it's a matter of scrubbing out any mention of missions and operations that might tend to embarrass the US due to impropriety, than yes, I'd like to know what was going on. We have a right to know what our government is up to.
Shaffer, who is now a senior fellow at the Center for Advanced Defense Studies in Washington, describes a number of planned covert operations, including an aborted cross-border surveillance operation using sophisticated eavesdropping technology that targeted high-level al-Qaeda operatives based in the tribal areas of Pakistan.
The operation was shut down by military officials concerned about offending Pakistan, according to Shaffer's account.
So, we shouldn't be able to know that high level terrorists are still running about planning and participating in violent bloodshed against their own people and others?
Naturally, vendors and resellers won't accept opened software packages or refund them, so that customer can either accept the EULA or be the proud owner of a new shiny frisbee.
That's what they tell you, but if you are persistent you can get a refund. People have to educate themselves and assert their rights. One right is to not buy something.
You buy something (and you *are* buying it, because the "agreement" isn't presented before the sale.)
You try to install it, and disagree with the EULA, so press "I disagree", and the software doesn't get installed.
I agree that this is an issue with "shrink wrap" consumer software.
But the bigger players use this with "enterprise grade" software that the buyer (should have) read the licence before agreeing to. If you *agree* to a licence that prohibits resale, that's on you.
Court Says First Sale Doctrine Doesn't Apply To Licensed Software
No, that's not what the Court said. Here's a more accurate sound bite:
the first sale doctrine is "unavailable to those who are only licensed to use their copies of copyrighted works."
What the Court is saying is that *if you agree* to a licence that prohibits you from reselling the software, than you can't resell it. It's a licencing issue, not an ownership issue.
What to learn from this? Don't agree to this sort of licence. Build software in-house (or have built for you), or use Open Source. This sort of licence will start to fade as more and more Open Source projects attain "enterprise quality". Tell these software houses that still use this sort of licence to hit the road.
Slashdot Mirror
This is the truth. There are many many many companies who have been issued HUGE blocks that they don't and can not possibly use. If all the WASTED blocks were recouvered, IPv4 would not be nearly as close as it (not really) is to being "full".
Ballmer is that you?
Oh good grief. You don't use Office-like tools in a professional setting, do you? Otherwise you would not make such absurd comments. The facts are that Excel and Excel macro capabilities are one of the main reasons that businesses use the Office suite. And, OO (like with GIMP and Photoshop) simply does *NOT* measure up. Yet.
It's *NOT* about being a Microsoft "shill", it's a matter of being realistic and understanding that the Open Office product doesn't *YET* measure up in terms of professional standards and needs, what people that use such products in a serious business setting need.
Seriously, idiots like you hold Open Source back.
I realize you're probably just trolling, but in what way can Open Office not compete with MS Office?
And GIMP is every bit as good as Photoshop, if not better, right? Right?
So? Your point? Are you saying that the findings are bunk? Or are you just pissing about enterprising people who make more money than you?
...in a way that many of them think is private.
This is an anecdote that expired a few years ago. I do not believe that there are very many people at all that still believe this. Indeed, it's *ALL OVER* the news about how very little of people's "on-line" life is private.
I'm sorry, what crime are you talking about? The border guards did nothing illegal as far as the GDR law is concerned, since they were military personnel whose service consisted of preventing people to escape by any means necessary.
Putting them on a FRG trial many years afterwards is simply pure nonsense to satisfy crazy mobs. FRG law didn't apply in that region back then.
So, you have no problems with the gassing of Jews in the camps, either?
Not really. Microsoft has made it clear that support for XP is coming to a close.
Hint: if you're calling someone a douche, you're the juvenile one.
I know you are but what am I?
This could be glossing over quite a bit of useful work for Oracles customers.
Dude, get with the program. Oracle is up there with Microsoft in the Slashdot-Hate department. If a "story" can be slanted against them, we go all the way...
And you call your PC a "boxen" too, right?
Google doesn't make money by selling searches to "end users", they make money by selling ads. So this new "functionality" is a surprise how?
Microsoft and their associated Windows shills are loving this. Fortunately, I'm not rich enough to afford 64bit hardware, but still this is not good...
He goes all his life with nothing more serious than a hacking charge. Then, a few weeks after antagonising a powerful country, he's accused of rape.
Clearly, opportunity did not become realistic until recently, when he lost his virginity to one of these young ladies. Then he went ape-shit crazy to try everything he had seen in his formidable pornography collection.
The problem is the circumstances and timing here lead one to think its a smear campaign...
The "circumstances and timing" are that he was in Sweden and stayed with these ladies.
...especially since no charges are being filed for this particular incident.
The investigation on the "molestation" accusation is not complete. There very well may be charges. Or not.
But still has his reputation scarred for life...
The issue of his ungentlemanly behavior with these two ladies has not yet been resolved. While Julian Assange continues to make suggestions of a "smear", in actuality there is no evidence of any such thing. In fact, one of his accusers is a long-time Wikileaks supporter.
It *IS* relevant to consider "smear" campaigns and watch for them, but just because Assange is involved in a "noble cause" doesn't mean he isn't a creep with the ladies. Many males in his position would become susceptible to ego bloat, and geeks are well know to covet their porn. Who is to say if things didn't get away from Assange?
Oh, and Hans Reiser didn't murder his wife.
This guy built a car in 1984 that got 103.7 miles per gallon driving from Mexico to the Canadian border.
Tacoma native driving from Bellingham to Mexico on a tank of gas...
Cocksmoking is illegal in my state without a doctor's perscription.
come back to the site more frequently and stay there longer
No thanks!
The website at steflewandowski.com contains elements from the site inlovebot.com, which appears to host malware - software that can hurt your computer or otherwise operate without your consent. Just visiting a site that contains malware can infect your computer.
It is not censorship if the author does not want to embarrass Pakistan and agrees that the incident should be omitted.
Who said anything about censorship? I think we have a right to know.
Shaffer, who is now a senior fellow at the Center for Advanced Defense Studies in Washington, describes a number of planned covert operations, including an aborted cross-border surveillance operation using sophisticated eavesdropping technology that targeted high-level al-Qaeda operatives based in the tribal areas of Pakistan.
The operation was shut down by military officials concerned about offending Pakistan, according to Shaffer's account.
So, we shouldn't be able to know that high level terrorists are still running about planning and participating in violent bloodshed against their own people and others?
Is this perhaps a job for Wikileaks? There are copies "in the wild" after all...
Naturally, vendors and resellers won't accept opened software packages or refund them, so that customer can either accept the EULA or be the proud owner of a new shiny frisbee.
That's what they tell you, but if you are persistent you can get a refund. People have to educate themselves and assert their rights. One right is to not buy something.
You buy something (and you *are* buying it, because the "agreement" isn't presented before the sale.) You try to install it, and disagree with the EULA, so press "I disagree", and the software doesn't get installed.
I agree that this is an issue with "shrink wrap" consumer software.
But the bigger players use this with "enterprise grade" software that the buyer (should have) read the licence before agreeing to. If you *agree* to a licence that prohibits resale, that's on you.
Court Says First Sale Doctrine Doesn't Apply To Licensed Software
No, that's not what the Court said. Here's a more accurate sound bite:
the first sale doctrine is "unavailable to those who are only licensed to use their copies of copyrighted works."
What the Court is saying is that *if you agree* to a licence that prohibits you from reselling the software, than you can't resell it. It's a licencing issue, not an ownership issue.
What to learn from this? Don't agree to this sort of licence. Build software in-house (or have built for you), or use Open Source. This sort of licence will start to fade as more and more Open Source projects attain "enterprise quality". Tell these software houses that still use this sort of licence to hit the road.