But then, whose whales are they anyway? It is not that you have to have a whaling industry to have an opinion on whether you want those creatures to stay or not.
There are many hunters in the US. I presume many more of them would like to kill a grizzly than there are of them. So yes, this one of those (many) times that government is GOOD.
DNA should be stored/analyzed at one place, together with a code. The name, address etc. should be at another place, identified by that code. If the police has a sample, they can get it analyzed, but don't have the identity yet. The second organisation should be supervised by a committee. They look at the police report, determine whether its merrits are sufficient to release the name. The database itself cannot be read if there is no majority (e.g., each of the committee members has part of the password to unlock the database).
We beg to differ. In particular we noted the term "not", which is in our code. You are also infringing with individual characters, the nature and place of which we will not disclose until in court.
e) A user is free to run a legal copy of the OS in a virtual environment; and the manufacturer may take no measures to prevent that. f) A single copy of the OS on a computer may both be used for direct boot, or for use in a virtual environment, and the manufacturer may not take any measures to prevent that.
Well, I may be a Mac fanboi but I'd cut MS a little bit more slack.
a) The price may depend on the number of licenses sold. b) Any PC manufacturers can get the OEM license, without further conditions. This makes retailers free to offer dual boot Windows/Linux systems. It is something we currently don't see, would allow PC manufacturers to advertise the systems, getting Linux in the hands of more people. Theres days HDs are big and cheap. c) The retail version may be up to $50 more expensive than the OEM license (box, manual, profit for retailers etc. cost money too) d) any protocol/file format must be open and clear.
Other than that, your points are basically OK, and would achieve way more than fines, penitence donations etc.
Wasn't a most important point not that a large list of problematic point would be sent to the central organisation in case of a No-vote? Well, MS missed the yes, but still doesn't suffer from the detriimental effects a No-vote would have had. The outrage will subdue, but the effect that the problematic points were not submitted will continue to have its effect.
Let's hope they create life from oppositely handed aminoacids (OK, they may use glycine;-) ) and oppositely winding DNA. That should keep us and the environment fairly safe.
Any person involved in Sweden (and any other country where purportedly similar shady actions occurred) with this issue should help to make sure that as much evidence as possible is registered, as it may be necessary in the future.
Possible things: The odd 20 companies, who represented them, presentations lists of previous meetings showing their absence, etc., etc.
I understand that to resize, you need to need to remove 1 pixel over all the height (or width) of a picture. I understand that doing that as a row/column is not a good idea, and that there is nothing wrong with doing it as a path. I also get that there are paths that are more suitable for removal than others.
Now, how to determine the paths? The authors are talking about energy levels, which I don't get, and gradients. What do they mean by that, and how do they determine it? They talk about an 8-point connection (which, I presume, is the 8 pixels surrounding a non-edge pixel). Are they looking for a path having the least amount of intensity difference? (If so, wouldn't a picture with a lightning bolt be very susceptible to have the bolt removed?). My problem with that is that it is very likely that part of a path (say, the lower half of a vertical path) that is optimum, is also the optimum path for another path starting somewhere else. So, like a capital Y, two starting points (the top tips of the Y), end up following the same path. Now, if I remove one path to shrink the picture, the second path is no longer available (part of it is MIA). So, paths are not allowed to overlap, I guess. That would mean that not too many paths can be available on a picture, yet the pictures they show displaying the paths are fully coloured.
To explain how you run out of paths soon: Suppose it does work like you cannot cross paths (or have overlap), once you have two paths and one crossing that, you run out of paths. Example, the capitla N, with two vertical paths and one going from topleft to bottom right. For none of the starting pixels at the top between the vertical legs of the N, a path is available anymore (once the \ path is established). So, should there be an algorithm (weighting factor) to make sure we have enough paths by detecting such nasty inclined paths?
I presume, as soon as a movie version is available. Not that they cannot live without the technology now, but they can rightfully say when distorting things that they leave things into perspective.
Well, there is a new twist. While I'm not exactly happy in the way the OO is a copy of MS Office, OO does two things. Level the barrier of switching over, and writing stuff in a format that is open. I have a small company, and to run it more efficiently, that open nature is very appealing to improve my business processes. Now ODF is an ISO standard, that gives me credence to justify my choice of the format when dealing with other companies (OK, OO does another thing: Being free, I can tell other companies to get a copy too).
That is interesting. From the little I just learned about AIR, I believe that it could be integrated in web-applications (like the one that runs in my company). If we can get a project like yours to talk to mine (v.v.), then that could get very interesting.
I've been working for an office for many years, running Office on PCs. We echanged Word documents with other companies, also running PCs. When talking to a client on the phone, it turned out that they layout had gone haywire anyway. What's on my page 8 at the bottom, is at their top page 9. That is just from opening, not from messing with the document. Word is not compatible with itself, be it due to different versions of Word, or perhaps due to different versions of Windows. I've my own company now, use Word (aarghh), and know that these situations don't happen just because I use Word on a Mac.
For my company, I'll take a look at what Adobe comes up with, but if they use a proprietary format instead of ODF or (editable) PDF, it is unlikely to get much further attention.
While on-topic in a strict sense would only discuss and solve the poster's problem, but I think the Slashdot crowd may want to learn from the poster's problem and apply the learnings to their particular situation. That would probably require a less strict interpretation of on-topic. In my case, my company is all Mac and apart from the odd desktop, all personel have laptops, so I have read this thread with great interest.
I have a company. We create our own e-mails and content. Anti-virus programs not only may cost money, but need attention too. And they can be a major pain in the butt if they are overzealous, making you refuse new software or even causing (repairable) damage to your system. No thanks. We have taken our responsibility by not running Windows.
I have a company. Were I to have a business partner with reasoning like that I wouldn't mind being on your block list as it would possibly symptomatic for the sense in other decisions you make too. Not that I would ever make your block list (Windows free environment) and we create our e-mails and files ourselves.
Sorry, but that is how science works. And if their new theory doesn't result in new (testable) predictions the scientific community doesn't give very many mod points. If there is a prediction that can be tested and passes the test the theory is accepted as "current best" until someone finds any fault with it. So, it doesn't work like religion where you can just throw in "God" to make everything fit.
Don't fool yourself. The proponents of software patents will soon have another foot in the door with the TRIPS agreement, which has influenced the EPC2000, which will come into effect in December (or possibly earlier).
As another factor that brings them joy is that a status quo is being created. "Companies have spent so much money on these sw patents. Being granted by the EPO, these companies had an expectation that they would be held up in court."
This terrible situation is caused mainly by one (Dutch)man with the EPO, under whose direction the definitions stretched time after time, until we're in the situation we're now.
Nice idea, but the advantage of fixed fees (like for patent annuities) is that it does away with a lot of bureaucracy.
The good thing about OSS copyright is that it allows the copyright holder to force another person to abide the conditions. So, having rights is a good thing. Perhaps it should work like this that if your product is free, you get a deduction of 100% on the annuity.
1) The time has been spent however you turn it. 2) Tell me about this physics knowledge you have of spending money and getting time back. I'm getting older now, and I do have a couple of thousand here. Tell us the secret. 3) Be grateful to the pirate. The pirate saved you effort. You didn't have to burn another disk, and push it through the channel. (Oh, and in case someone didn't pirate your effort, you still get money. I'm making a backup as we speak, burning 2 DVDs, and there is a (small) tax on it, which I'm sure goes straight to the artists).
Bert Who is a patent attorney, hates piracy and has legal stuff only but severely detests the position of the copyright maffia. Copyright law should be reformed: 20 years max. and you pay for it to get the copyright, just like the other IP rights. DRM, then you're not giving to society and you're not entitled to copyright protection. People should be allowed to put stuff on the player they want (and yes, they should be punished if they pirate stuff).
Slashdot Mirror
But then, whose whales are they anyway? It is not that you have to have a whaling industry to have an opinion on whether you want those creatures to stay or not.
There are many hunters in the US. I presume many more of them would like to kill a grizzly than there are of them. So yes, this one of those (many) times that government is GOOD.
Bert
DNA should be stored/analyzed at one place, together with a code. The name, address etc. should be at another place, identified by that code. If the police has a sample, they can get it analyzed, but don't have the identity yet. The second organisation should be supervised by a committee. They look at the police report, determine whether its merrits are sufficient to release the name. The database itself cannot be read if there is no majority (e.g., each of the committee members has part of the password to unlock the database).
Bert
"This sig does not contain any SCO code."
We beg to differ. In particular we noted the term "not", which is in our code. You are also infringing with individual characters, the nature and place of which we will not disclose until in court.
Our lawyers will be in contact with you.
D. McBride
Here's some more:
e) A user is free to run a legal copy of the OS in a virtual environment; and the manufacturer may take no measures to prevent that.
f) A single copy of the OS on a computer may both be used for direct boot, or for use in a virtual environment, and the manufacturer may not take any measures to prevent that.
Bert
Well, I may be a Mac fanboi but I'd cut MS a little bit more slack.
a) The price may depend on the number of licenses sold.
b) Any PC manufacturers can get the OEM license, without further conditions. This makes retailers free to offer dual boot Windows/Linux systems. It is something we currently don't see, would allow PC manufacturers to advertise the systems, getting Linux in the hands of more people. Theres days HDs are big and cheap.
c) The retail version may be up to $50 more expensive than the OEM license (box, manual, profit for retailers etc. cost money too)
d) any protocol/file format must be open and clear.
Other than that, your points are basically OK, and would achieve way more than fines, penitence donations etc.
Bert
No, the industry would have been better off with open standards for file formats, network connectivity etc.
Bert
Who runs a company
So, the big fireballs in the WTC towers must have been great, right? Or can we agree that we're better of with some phenomena being nicely contained?
Bert
Wasn't a most important point not that a large list of problematic point would be sent to the central organisation in case of a No-vote? Well, MS missed the yes, but still doesn't suffer from the detriimental effects a No-vote would have had. The outrage will subdue, but the effect that the problematic points were not submitted will continue to have its effect.
Bert
Let's hope they create life from oppositely handed aminoacids (OK, they may use glycine ;-) ) and oppositely winding DNA. That should keep us and the environment fairly safe.
Bert
Any person involved in Sweden (and any other country where purportedly similar shady actions occurred) with this issue should help to make sure that as much evidence as possible is registered, as it may be necessary in the future.
Possible things:
The odd 20 companies, who represented them, presentations lists of previous meetings showing their absence, etc., etc.
Bert
I understand that to resize, you need to need to remove 1 pixel over all the height (or width) of a picture. I understand that doing that as a row/column is not a good idea, and that there is nothing wrong with doing it as a path. I also get that there are paths that are more suitable for removal than others.
Now, how to determine the paths? The authors are talking about energy levels, which I don't get, and gradients. What do they mean by that, and how do they determine it? They talk about an 8-point connection (which, I presume, is the 8 pixels surrounding a non-edge pixel). Are they looking for a path having the least amount of intensity difference? (If so, wouldn't a picture with a lightning bolt be very susceptible to have the bolt removed?). My problem with that is that it is very likely that part of a path (say, the lower half of a vertical path) that is optimum, is also the optimum path for another path starting somewhere else. So, like a capital Y, two starting points (the top tips of the Y), end up following the same path. Now, if I remove one path to shrink the picture, the second path is no longer available (part of it is MIA). So, paths are not allowed to overlap, I guess. That would mean that not too many paths can be available on a picture, yet the pictures they show displaying the paths are fully coloured.
To explain how you run out of paths soon: Suppose it does work like you cannot cross paths (or have overlap), once you have two paths and one crossing that, you run out of paths. Example, the capitla N, with two vertical paths and one going from topleft to bottom right. For none of the starting pixels at the top between the vertical legs of the N, a path is available anymore (once the \ path is established). So, should there be an algorithm (weighting factor) to make sure we have enough paths by detecting such nasty inclined paths?
Bert
I presume, as soon as a movie version is available. Not that they cannot live without the technology now, but they can rightfully say when distorting things that they leave things into perspective.
Bert
While I concur with you, I must remind you that we have the same problem about how things (you know, the universe and all) started from nothing.
Bert
Well, there is a new twist. While I'm not exactly happy in the way the OO is a copy of MS Office, OO does two things. Level the barrier of switching over, and writing stuff in a format that is open. I have a small company, and to run it more efficiently, that open nature is very appealing to improve my business processes. Now ODF is an ISO standard, that gives me credence to justify my choice of the format when dealing with other companies (OK, OO does another thing: Being free, I can tell other companies to get a copy too).
Bert
That is interesting. From the little I just learned about AIR, I believe that it could be integrated in web-applications (like the one that runs in my company). If we can get a project like yours to talk to mine (v.v.), then that could get very interesting.
Bert
I've been working for an office for many years, running Office on PCs. We echanged Word documents with other companies, also running PCs. When talking to a client on the phone, it turned out that they layout had gone haywire anyway. What's on my page 8 at the bottom, is at their top page 9. That is just from opening, not from messing with the document. Word is not compatible with itself, be it due to different versions of Word, or perhaps due to different versions of Windows. I've my own company now, use Word (aarghh), and know that these situations don't happen just because I use Word on a Mac.
For my company, I'll take a look at what Adobe comes up with, but if they use a proprietary format instead of ODF or (editable) PDF, it is unlikely to get much further attention.
Bert
While on-topic in a strict sense would only discuss and solve the poster's problem, but I think the Slashdot crowd may want to learn from the poster's problem and apply the learnings to their particular situation. That would probably require a less strict interpretation of on-topic. In my case, my company is all Mac and apart from the odd desktop, all personel have laptops, so I have read this thread with great interest.
Bert
I have a company. We create our own e-mails and content. Anti-virus programs not only may cost money, but need attention too. And they can be a major pain in the butt if they are overzealous, making you refuse new software or even causing (repairable) damage to your system. No thanks. We have taken our responsibility by not running Windows.
Bert
I have a company. Were I to have a business partner with reasoning like that I wouldn't mind being on your block list as it would possibly symptomatic for the sense in other decisions you make too. Not that I would ever make your block list (Windows free environment) and we create our e-mails and files ourselves.
Bert
Sorry, but that is how science works. And if their new theory doesn't result in new (testable) predictions the scientific community doesn't give very many mod points. If there is a prediction that can be tested and passes the test the theory is accepted as "current best" until someone finds any fault with it. So, it doesn't work like religion where you can just throw in "God" to make everything fit.
Bert
Very interesting. Thanks.
Bert
Don't fool yourself. The proponents of software patents will soon have another foot in the door with the TRIPS agreement, which has influenced the EPC2000, which will come into effect in December (or possibly earlier).
As another factor that brings them joy is that a status quo is being created. "Companies have spent so much money on these sw patents. Being granted by the EPO, these companies had an expectation that they would be held up in court."
This terrible situation is caused mainly by one (Dutch)man with the EPO, under whose direction the definitions stretched time after time, until we're in the situation we're now.
Bert
Nice idea, but the advantage of fixed fees (like for patent annuities) is that it does away with a lot of bureaucracy.
The good thing about OSS copyright is that it allows the copyright holder to force another person to abide the conditions. So, having rights is a good thing. Perhaps it should work like this that if your product is free, you get a deduction of 100% on the annuity.
Bert
Oomph, where's the logic?
1) The time has been spent however you turn it.
2) Tell me about this physics knowledge you have of spending money and getting time back. I'm getting older now, and I do have a couple of thousand here. Tell us the secret.
3) Be grateful to the pirate. The pirate saved you effort. You didn't have to burn another disk, and push it through the channel. (Oh, and in case someone didn't pirate your effort, you still get money. I'm making a backup as we speak, burning 2 DVDs, and there is a (small) tax on it, which I'm sure goes straight to the artists).
Bert
Who is a patent attorney, hates piracy and has legal stuff only but severely detests the position of the copyright maffia. Copyright law should be reformed: 20 years max. and you pay for it to get the copyright, just like the other IP rights. DRM, then you're not giving to society and you're not entitled to copyright protection. People should be allowed to put stuff on the player they want (and yes, they should be punished if they pirate stuff).
That chance that it gets hit is only half as large as with a regular car!
Bert