Insofar as instant/SMS messaging in English is also concerned (also discussed in the article), surely nothing more advanced than Pig Latin (known to confuse many poor parents... for a while) would be necessary to circumvent this.
(I'd thought this was a novel idea, but I understand from a quick Google that it's been done for similar reasons...)
Well I am neither a lawyer nor an American but here in the UK there are two stages between a conversation with a policeman and a judge (or magistrate) - arrest and approval for prosecution (here by an organisation called the Crown Prosecution Service - perhaps your District Attorney's Office is something similar).
In any case, even without involving that second level, surely the two requirements for arrest are common: a charge and a complainant.
This being the case, at least here, my answer would certainly have been "arrest me"! (I'd guess the 'jobsworth' had neither...)
what's exactly the fun of watching a cartoon in a category where a lot of real movies are, imho, better ?
I agree: I stopped reading novels in favour of comic books, stopped reading them in favour of animation, stopped watching that in favour of live action feature films, ditched those in favour of tv movies, then soaps, infomercials and political broadcasts and finally gave up the lot in favour of trolling on Slashdot...
How can they know? unless they are somehow involved.....
Well...
Gostev said that the information on the attack could be found on "specialist web sites" although at the time of going to press the INQ couldn't find them.
... but that might be because many of those "specialist web sites" are subscription-only;)
Very much agree with what you're saying... but it doesn't answer why you think IBM, Sun, HP and Novell have changed; where they get their chances they'll still play the proprietary game (as previously evidenced by CICS, Java, IPX/SPX etc.).
And it's not like Microsoft haven't gone the distance with some collaboratively-designed open standards: I'd nominate SOAP as an example.
It's my opinion that all of these companies have exactly the kind of schizophrenic approach to standards that makes business 'sense'...
"Crank out a quick letter or memo" (in Word) and send it as PDF?
Inumerable people do this every day without giving a rats about XML and/or what OS/editing tools their colleagues are using...
My fault - you even said "that" article. (No excuse for my not noticing, but with this interface it helps to quote...)
For what it's worth I agree with you about Apple; looking into it further, feeling guilty, I can't find any evidence that Apple is using SVMs for spam classification (in fact Microsoft make much more noise about SVMs, in general, than Apple...)
Pivotal to the trio's spam firewall is the unique method of using a Support Vector Machine (SVM) to categorise emails. The only anti-spam software that analyses emails as a whole picture, rather than based solely on components such as key words or phrases, said Mr Sullivan.
Seems pretty clear to me...
(Are we reading the same article? On the quoted psyorg.com one I see nothing about clustering...)
Then I should stop firewalling those applications whose account-based access methods are too weak, because according to your definition that makes them already firewalled!
(Unless you really meant 'device', because then they're not... and neither is my 'firewall'!)
Wasn't making a great revelation that many of such things do exist (sorry if the wording sounded aggressive - I was annoyed by the article, not your suggestion), nor that they're configured in the way you suggest (which I think is spot on).
Using the term I suggest at least finds some discussion of this idea, like the following article:
Like Java is doing- and C++ has still to do you mean?
Sun have a time machine?!?
I'm confused in that case, what was your problem with Java?
That all our experience with it so far (because that's what the article's about), and legacy code for years to come, is based on type casts everywhere and reliance on dynamic type checking.
(What's more there will be lots of programmers whose CVs prove they 'know' Java who won't use features grafted on after the fact.)
Slashdot Mirror
Insofar as instant/SMS messaging in English is also concerned (also discussed in the article), surely nothing more advanced than Pig Latin (known to confuse many poor parents... for a while) would be necessary to circumvent this.
(I'd thought this was a novel idea, but I understand from a quick Google that it's been done for similar reasons...)
Well I am neither a lawyer nor an American but here in the UK there are two stages between a conversation with a policeman and a judge (or magistrate) - arrest and approval for prosecution (here by an organisation called the Crown Prosecution Service - perhaps your District Attorney's Office is something similar).
In any case, even without involving that second level, surely the two requirements for arrest are common: a charge and a complainant.
This being the case, at least here, my answer would certainly have been "arrest me"! (I'd guess the 'jobsworth' had neither...)
Last time I was there South Africa wasn't in Asia.
:p
I believe the same is true of New Zealand!
Three continents too few for you?
Never mind bloat, what about stability... you're headed rapidly towards... Windows!
And, in fact, it's misleading to put it down to one telescope - yes one first saw it, but "the team at the CfA used a network of small telescopes" http://www.theregister.co.uk/2004/08/25/planet_fou nd/
Except that if the case was really, as suggested, won on copyright having lapsed then there's no useful precedent to be gained...
Yeah, was mentioned a previous time Slashdot ran this non-story: http://games.slashdot.org/games/03/05/19/0313200.s html?tid=127&tid=186
Very much agree with what you're saying... but it doesn't answer why you think IBM, Sun, HP and Novell have changed; where they get their chances they'll still play the proprietary game (as previously evidenced by CICS, Java, IPX/SPX etc.).
And it's not like Microsoft haven't gone the distance with some collaboratively-designed open standards: I'd nominate SOAP as an example.
It's my opinion that all of these companies have exactly the kind of schizophrenic approach to standards that makes business 'sense'...
"Crank out a quick letter or memo" (in Word) and send it as PDF? Inumerable people do this every day without giving a rats about XML and/or what OS/editing tools their colleagues are using...
My fault - you even said "that" article. (No excuse for my not noticing, but with this interface it helps to quote...) For what it's worth I agree with you about Apple; looking into it further, feeling guilty, I can't find any evidence that Apple is using SVMs for spam classification (in fact Microsoft make much more noise about SVMs, in general, than Apple...)
Seems pretty clear to me...
(Are we reading the same article? On the quoted psyorg.com one I see nothing about clustering...)
Yeah, shame I ran XviD in WMP, though...
Yes, analogy is the same as definition.
That's why it's sufficient for mathematicians to understand, say, that a lattice is something plants grow up!
Then I should stop firewalling those applications whose account-based access methods are too weak, because according to your definition that makes them already firewalled!
(Unless you really meant 'device', because then they're not... and neither is my 'firewall'!)
Wasn't making a great revelation that many of such things do exist (sorry if the wording sounded aggressive - I was annoyed by the article, not your suggestion), nor that they're configured in the way you suggest (which I think is spot on).
Using the term I suggest at least finds some discussion of this idea, like the following article:
http://www.nwfusion.com/newsletters/sec/0913sec2.A useful sandbox has levels of permissions and write access to the hdd is a common one such...
This isn't a firewall as it doesn't filter based on addressing. Furthermore, the use of SVMs (support vector machines) to classify text is not new...
That all our experience with it so far (because that's what the article's about), and legacy code for years to come, is based on type casts everywhere and reliance on dynamic type checking.
(What's more there will be lots of programmers whose CVs prove they 'know' Java who won't use features grafted on after the fact.)
It's like staring into the puke of a goat that broke into a photo lab...