...pr0n, of course. Now we can accurately predict and model the exact size and specularity of Linsey Lohan's boobies, using this revolutionary new (wait for it) Mellon Engine.
Truly, we live in the future.
Looks spiffy. I'm seriously a geek in heaven lately...it seems that now my biggest problem is choosing between all the pretty, easy, functional linux installs I could be running and resisting the urge to "catch 'em all."
I do find myself occasionally wishing, though, that some of the effort being put into endlessly fragmenting and repackaging linux could be put into taking some of the great apps available and turning them from "good, functional, usable, and fast" into "droolingly beautiful and slick as Elvis' hair."
Hokey smokes, Rocky...I had to read that like 5 times to get anything out of it, and I'm still not sure I got what it actually means. Which is a good thing for you I suppose, because I have a patent on "easily readable English language paragraphs, containing links to subjects mentioned in the paragraph, and posted on a public forum."
...say that you should buy more security products! Wow, it's almost like the MS studies that say linux is more expensive and the environmental studies by the meat industry that say millions of gallons of pig shit isn't harmful to the environment so you might as well just spray it into the air.
This is the second one in as many days, too. Come on, could we get a real story, not one spun from the gossamer threads of greed and conflict of interest?
Legally speaking, yes you do, at least in America. Courts has struggled with the question of giving notice by publication, and have eventually come up with the standard of "reasonably calculated to give actual notice, and only in cases where individual notice is impossible or unduly burdensome."
An English language notice is not reasonably calculated to give actual notice, unless they really think there are 50,000 old ladies at Google reading each indexed link. And individual notice would have been easy. Just call Google (if you are too lazy, greedy, or stupid to actually fix the "problem").
You're also going to get into issues with promissory estoppel here. This is the equivalent of having a book of "free," but copyrighted, cover sheet designs from your local copier and waiting for the litigo-terrorism hilarity to ensue.
Sorry for the language, but as a big fan of the law I get pretty peeved when people try to twist a technicality into making the law a sword rather than a shield.
Once upon a time, this would have worked. Take the emerging layout standard that doesn't use your bizarro extensions and strange layout tactics, decide not to support it, and force everyone who wants slick new layout features to write for either you or everyone else, or else write every page twice.
But I'm not so sure this is a good idea now. The fact is that more and more people are getting to the point that they would rather write for everyone but IE rather than just IE. I think falling behind on standards while steaming ahead with the next generation of crappy proprietary extensions just isn't going to work again. In fact, I think this might accellerate the death of IE.
Bottom line: bad move. The correct response to more competition is to compete, not to stick your fingers in your ears and scream "LA LA LA I'M NOT LISTENING!"
Rob Hersov, then boss of Sportal - now vice-chairman of executive plane company NetJets - says the collapse was precipitated by nothing less than "mass market hysteria".
Well, that's a little bit strong, don't you think? The.com collapse was really tragic, but it was far from unpredictable, hysterical, or preventable. Just basic macro economics -- when there are economic profits (not just accounting profits) in a market then entrance is encouraged, and when these profits dry up then the market participants take a while to come back down to equilibrium, just likePavlov's dogs took a good while to stop salivating when the dinner bell was rung.
I more agreed with Julie:
Julie Meyer, co-founder of First Tuesday, puts it this way: "It's not that I didn't think it was coming. It was that you never see the shape of things until it happens."
When someone who's both a lawyer and an economist says a license is difficult to interpret, I tend to believe them. Even his assertion that these licenses are obfuscated is, itself, obfuscated.
Okay, so this is obviously dumb, but I'll go one better. It's also probably unjustifiable and unconstitutional.
The general justification put forth for sales tax is that it's a tax on doing business in the state and using the existing infrastructure of that state so to do. The internet doesn't really do that.
Also, there's a good argument to be made that the Negative Commerce Clause prohibits this kind of action by a state or local government. In essence, Congress gets to regulate interstate commerce, not Wisconsin.
That being that one of the main things (if not the main thing) I pay for when I prepare my taxes with TurboTax or what have you is the privaledge to have my filing done electronically. Since non-government bodies have to go through an irritating process and some money to be able to file these forms electronically, logically it seems to me that you're going to end up either having to pay for the software or mail in a bunch of paper.
You're not really buying programming there, you're buying a lawyer's time through proxy. All the lawyers I know bill out in six minute increments and earn every freakin' penny they make (and it's a lot of them), so I don't think you're going to be getting this kind of stuff for free. You could make the program free, but you'd still have to buy the advice.
That said, TurboTax for the Web is cheaper, works for everyone who only lived in one state this tax season, and will run in Firefox on Linux and Mac, so at least you don't have to use Windows if it's not your cup of tea.
Let's think clearly and logically for just a moment here. I see a lot of argument about the dictionary meaning of "journalism" and whether or not blogs qualify. I don't want to take a position on that. But I do want to take the position that whatever your opinion is about the journalistic purpose or lack thereof with regards to bloggers or a particular blog, it kind of doesn't matter with respect to this story.
Let's not lose sight of the fact that Judges are there to make rulings on matters of law, not to assign value judgements about the worth or societal value or accuracy of a given practice. This isn't a ruling that ThinkSecret isn't "real journalism" or that it's creator isn't a journalist (whatever that means). It's just a legal judgement about whether or not the practices he employs qualify him for protection by certain laws.
I'll even go so far as to make a speculation about what laws were relevant. I'd imagine that TS argued that he could not be compelled to disclose the identity of a source who preferred to remain anonymous because journalists get to protect their sources. I also imagine that the judge found from the facts presented (or lack thereof) that the standard practices which allow for that kind of protection were not generally followed on TS. For example, to shield sources in this way, a journalist usually has to show both that he corroborated this particular piece of info in some way and that it was the regular practice of his outlet so to do. TS clearly doesn't operate that way...which isn't bad or wrong in my opinion, but it would be an abuse of these laws to let them apply in the TS scenario.
Let's not make this about some kind of slam on the blog community. Judges exist to know the rules and to apply them fairly. TS took a shot at interpreting the rules one way, and the judge said no. Don't get distracted by the rhetoric.
I don't want this to seem accusatory, so I'll preface it by saying it's really not. This is actual curiosity talking.
It has been oft stated by those speaking for your company, both employed by Microsoft and simply advocating your software, that if Linux had the same market share as Windows then a similar number of vulnerabilities would be found and a similar number of viruses written, etc. In short, that the current lack of strong security of Windows based systems is due largely to market share.
I also know that this claim has been disputed by studies comparing things like bugs-per-line and things like that. I am skeptical of such trivial arguments.
My question is, have there been any studies done on this proposition, and if so, what were the specifics of those studies?
This really isn't all that surprising or even alarming to me. The Constitution isn't most holy writ, it's just a law. If you want people to know the law, you have to teach it to them. I firmly believe that basic con law and contracts should be taught in grade school, or at least in college (when people have attained majority and it starts to matter more). Yes the law is difficult and esoteric, but there's some amount of it we all need.
If someone refused to learn CPR because they weren't studying to be a doctor, we'd consider them to be lazy and a little hazardous to their peers. I think the law falls into the same camp. Certainly you're way more likely to sign a contract in a given day than you are to have a heart attack.
I'm no expert in the EU legal system, so I could be out to lunch here, but I don't think an appeal is just another chance to duke it out. Usually there have to be specific issues preserved and reopened on appeal, and I can't think of what those issues would be in such a decision. Does anyone know what their grounds for appeal would have been? The law student in me is deathly curious.
...desperately want to run as little Sun software as possible! Help us, IBM!
Seriously, does anyone take Sun seriously anymore? Bad prices, complete sellout, ancient repackaged ugly technology, and second-rate hardware? Sign me up!
Well, this might be a little early to be reading in what we're reading in, but as a side note the worst part of this is that if it goes through we'll be in effect paying the court costs of the *AA because prosecutors will be taking the cases.
On the other hand, at least the unjustly accused won't be run out of court for lack of council. The state will provide it.
Seriously, this is pure gold. Games that involve killing people in a pretend universe = bad. Games that actively advocate killing people for a living in the real world = patriotic?!
Even if this were perfect, it would still be stupid. Have you ever listened to yourself talk? Do you really want that recorded?
More to the point: have you ever learned a foreign language? Remember how obscenely different the written language is than the spoken one? The same is true of English, we just don't notice it as much. There are more stringent requirements for written speech -- that's why giving dictation is so hard. Complete sentences, no body language or appreciable emphases, paragraph structure, and correct grammar are all expected in writing but almost frowned on in speech (after all, do you look with admiration at someone who corrects your grammar, even in private)?
I suppose if you for some reason were vastly quicker at revising stream of consciousness drivel than you were at writing coherent prose then this might be useful. So maybe for journalists who do a lot of interviews?
Or, I suppose you could be writing the next Sound and the Fury, in which case please let me know so I can come shoot you before you inflict your Emperor's New Clothes on a whole new crop of high school English classes looking for meaning in a book which, ironically, signifies nothing.
Slashdot Mirror
...pr0n, of course. Now we can accurately predict and model the exact size and specularity of Linsey Lohan's boobies, using this revolutionary new (wait for it) Mellon Engine. Truly, we live in the future.
Looks spiffy. I'm seriously a geek in heaven lately...it seems that now my biggest problem is choosing between all the pretty, easy, functional linux installs I could be running and resisting the urge to "catch 'em all."
I do find myself occasionally wishing, though, that some of the effort being put into endlessly fragmenting and repackaging linux could be put into taking some of the great apps available and turning them from "good, functional, usable, and fast" into "droolingly beautiful and slick as Elvis' hair."
So, anyone out there upgrade his or her Myth box yet? Thoughts, if so?
Hokey smokes, Rocky...I had to read that like 5 times to get anything out of it, and I'm still not sure I got what it actually means. Which is a good thing for you I suppose, because I have a patent on "easily readable English language paragraphs, containing links to subjects mentioned in the paragraph, and posted on a public forum."
Next time, Gadget, next time!
...say that you should buy more security products! Wow, it's almost like the MS studies that say linux is more expensive and the environmental studies by the meat industry that say millions of gallons of pig shit isn't harmful to the environment so you might as well just spray it into the air.
This is the second one in as many days, too. Come on, could we get a real story, not one spun from the gossamer threads of greed and conflict of interest?
Legally speaking, yes you do, at least in America. Courts has struggled with the question of giving notice by publication, and have eventually come up with the standard of "reasonably calculated to give actual notice, and only in cases where individual notice is impossible or unduly burdensome."
An English language notice is not reasonably calculated to give actual notice, unless they really think there are 50,000 old ladies at Google reading each indexed link. And individual notice would have been easy. Just call Google (if you are too lazy, greedy, or stupid to actually fix the "problem").
You're also going to get into issues with promissory estoppel here. This is the equivalent of having a book of "free," but copyrighted, cover sheet designs from your local copier and waiting for the litigo-terrorism hilarity to ensue.
Sorry for the language, but as a big fan of the law I get pretty peeved when people try to twist a technicality into making the law a sword rather than a shield.
Oooooooh, if you want to be possessive, it's just I-T-S but if it's supposed to be a contraction then it's I-T apostrophe S. Scalawag.
Once upon a time, this would have worked. Take the emerging layout standard that doesn't use your bizarro extensions and strange layout tactics, decide not to support it, and force everyone who wants slick new layout features to write for either you or everyone else, or else write every page twice.
But I'm not so sure this is a good idea now. The fact is that more and more people are getting to the point that they would rather write for everyone but IE rather than just IE. I think falling behind on standards while steaming ahead with the next generation of crappy proprietary extensions just isn't going to work again. In fact, I think this might accellerate the death of IE.
Bottom line: bad move. The correct response to more competition is to compete, not to stick your fingers in your ears and scream "LA LA LA I'M NOT LISTENING!"
Well, that's a little bit strong, don't you think? The .com collapse was really tragic, but it was far from unpredictable, hysterical, or preventable. Just basic macro economics -- when there are economic profits (not just accounting profits) in a market then entrance is encouraged, and when these profits dry up then the market participants take a while to come back down to equilibrium, just likePavlov's dogs took a good while to stop salivating when the dinner bell was rung.
I more agreed with Julie:
Boy, how true did that turn out to be?
When someone who's both a lawyer and an economist says a license is difficult to interpret, I tend to believe them. Even his assertion that these licenses are obfuscated is, itself, obfuscated.
Okay, so this is obviously dumb, but I'll go one better. It's also probably unjustifiable and unconstitutional.
The general justification put forth for sales tax is that it's a tax on doing business in the state and using the existing infrastructure of that state so to do. The internet doesn't really do that.
Also, there's a good argument to be made that the Negative Commerce Clause prohibits this kind of action by a state or local government. In essence, Congress gets to regulate interstate commerce, not Wisconsin.
That being that one of the main things (if not the main thing) I pay for when I prepare my taxes with TurboTax or what have you is the privaledge to have my filing done electronically. Since non-government bodies have to go through an irritating process and some money to be able to file these forms electronically, logically it seems to me that you're going to end up either having to pay for the software or mail in a bunch of paper.
You're not really buying programming there, you're buying a lawyer's time through proxy. All the lawyers I know bill out in six minute increments and earn every freakin' penny they make (and it's a lot of them), so I don't think you're going to be getting this kind of stuff for free. You could make the program free, but you'd still have to buy the advice.
That said, TurboTax for the Web is cheaper, works for everyone who only lived in one state this tax season, and will run in Firefox on Linux and Mac, so at least you don't have to use Windows if it's not your cup of tea.
Let's think clearly and logically for just a moment here. I see a lot of argument about the dictionary meaning of "journalism" and whether or not blogs qualify. I don't want to take a position on that. But I do want to take the position that whatever your opinion is about the journalistic purpose or lack thereof with regards to bloggers or a particular blog, it kind of doesn't matter with respect to this story.
Let's not lose sight of the fact that Judges are there to make rulings on matters of law, not to assign value judgements about the worth or societal value or accuracy of a given practice. This isn't a ruling that ThinkSecret isn't "real journalism" or that it's creator isn't a journalist (whatever that means). It's just a legal judgement about whether or not the practices he employs qualify him for protection by certain laws.
I'll even go so far as to make a speculation about what laws were relevant. I'd imagine that TS argued that he could not be compelled to disclose the identity of a source who preferred to remain anonymous because journalists get to protect their sources. I also imagine that the judge found from the facts presented (or lack thereof) that the standard practices which allow for that kind of protection were not generally followed on TS. For example, to shield sources in this way, a journalist usually has to show both that he corroborated this particular piece of info in some way and that it was the regular practice of his outlet so to do. TS clearly doesn't operate that way...which isn't bad or wrong in my opinion, but it would be an abuse of these laws to let them apply in the TS scenario.
Let's not make this about some kind of slam on the blog community. Judges exist to know the rules and to apply them fairly. TS took a shot at interpreting the rules one way, and the judge said no. Don't get distracted by the rhetoric.
I don't want this to seem accusatory, so I'll preface it by saying it's really not. This is actual curiosity talking.
It has been oft stated by those speaking for your company, both employed by Microsoft and simply advocating your software, that if Linux had the same market share as Windows then a similar number of vulnerabilities would be found and a similar number of viruses written, etc. In short, that the current lack of strong security of Windows based systems is due largely to market share.
I also know that this claim has been disputed by studies comparing things like bugs-per-line and things like that. I am skeptical of such trivial arguments.
My question is, have there been any studies done on this proposition, and if so, what were the specifics of those studies?
This really isn't all that surprising or even alarming to me. The Constitution isn't most holy writ, it's just a law. If you want people to know the law, you have to teach it to them. I firmly believe that basic con law and contracts should be taught in grade school, or at least in college (when people have attained majority and it starts to matter more). Yes the law is difficult and esoteric, but there's some amount of it we all need.
If someone refused to learn CPR because they weren't studying to be a doctor, we'd consider them to be lazy and a little hazardous to their peers. I think the law falls into the same camp. Certainly you're way more likely to sign a contract in a given day than you are to have a heart attack.
I'm no expert in the EU legal system, so I could be out to lunch here, but I don't think an appeal is just another chance to duke it out. Usually there have to be specific issues preserved and reopened on appeal, and I can't think of what those issues would be in such a decision. Does anyone know what their grounds for appeal would have been? The law student in me is deathly curious.
...desperately want to run as little Sun software as possible! Help us, IBM!
Seriously, does anyone take Sun seriously anymore? Bad prices, complete sellout, ancient repackaged ugly technology, and second-rate hardware? Sign me up!
Or to try to get the names of the employees doing the violatin'! ;-)
Well, this might be a little early to be reading in what we're reading in, but as a side note the worst part of this is that if it goes through we'll be in effect paying the court costs of the *AA because prosecutors will be taking the cases.
On the other hand, at least the unjustly accused won't be run out of court for lack of council. The state will provide it.
Seriously, this is pure gold. Games that involve killing people in a pretend universe = bad. Games that actively advocate killing people for a living in the real world = patriotic?!
...the iPod would be dead! This is all a plot to bring down the iPod High Council!
...make deep bugs deeper. FOSS philosophy applied to viruses. Yikes.
Even if this were perfect, it would still be stupid. Have you ever listened to yourself talk? Do you really want that recorded?
More to the point: have you ever learned a foreign language? Remember how obscenely different the written language is than the spoken one? The same is true of English, we just don't notice it as much. There are more stringent requirements for written speech -- that's why giving dictation is so hard. Complete sentences, no body language or appreciable emphases, paragraph structure, and correct grammar are all expected in writing but almost frowned on in speech (after all, do you look with admiration at someone who corrects your grammar, even in private)?
I suppose if you for some reason were vastly quicker at revising stream of consciousness drivel than you were at writing coherent prose then this might be useful. So maybe for journalists who do a lot of interviews?
Or, I suppose you could be writing the next Sound and the Fury, in which case please let me know so I can come shoot you before you inflict your Emperor's New Clothes on a whole new crop of high school English classes looking for meaning in a book which, ironically, signifies nothing.
Amen. I can think of a thousand legitimate reasons why someone would want a PoC and demo of such software.
The re-election of GB is probably the worst thing to happen to this country since World War II, but it did happen I believe.