I started with Omikron Basic on Atari ST. The amazing thing with the Atari is, that graphics memory and main memory are one thing. Also there was no distinction between graphics-mode and text-mode. The only thing really limiting was the lack of dynamic memory allocation. Today I can see that newcomers feel clued out because by default they are presented with a window manager and lots of user-friendly software which gets in the way if you are trying to get to the bottom of things.
For proprietary software companies a copyright registration won't be a sufficient incentive to reveal the source code. They will just keep licensing binaries and use digital restriction management instead of the law to impose their rules on users.
The Linux community also requests that you don't charge a royalty or assert any patents covering driver code you are *not* contributing (such as "vfat.ko").
If you get your phone from a telecommunication provider it comes with SIMlock. If you get your E-Book reader from Amazon it comes with DRM. If you get your music player from Apple....
There's plenty of good E-Book readers to choose from (unless you want one with Windows on it). Most of them support both DRM as well as DRM-free formats.
I wonder whether the hardware creates the anaglyph or whether the device actually appears as two separate cameras. I have tried to use two USB cameras simultaneously before and it's a nightmare. The images are not synchronised and some software drivers block one camera or the other.
You might have thought it would be better to fund development of mechanisms to prevent or mitigate DDoS attacks, rather than rely on using them. The bad guys will always be able to command more bots than any legal response could.
You also might have thought it would be better to prevent Microsoft Windows rather than using it. But I guess it's too late in both cases because the stuff is owned, licensed, and controlled by third parties.
In his investigation he tried to show that child porn is frequently distributed by mail order, telephone hotlines, and mobile phones again. However dealers of child porn usually require potential customers to break the law by providing illegal material themselves before trusting them. In his hearing he admitted mistakes and he assured his innocence. He said that he had acted in the belief that he was permitted to perform such investigations as the responsible political authority.
Mrs president! Dear colleagues! I am voting against this law - in the meantime one must say: I have voted against this law - because it does not have anything to do with its caption. The goal, fighting child porn, was - contrary to all accussations and the inquiries against me - the prime motivation for me to concern myself with the internet.
I voted against this law not because I would not unconditionally support the goal but because that it is in fact - colleague Mrs Krogmann, I didn't understand your objections at this point - a law which would introduce a structure for surveillance in the free part of Germany for the first time since 1949.
I have voted against this law because it does not prevent child porn. This is a legend which our minister - I think it's a shame that she is not present - has created. She has said to all request which have been made - for example by the FDP party - that she wasn't presented with any insights. I submit: If one does not have any insights, one should participate in the debate; that would be the least one ought to demand.
(applause by deputy Renate Kuenast [BUENDNIS 90/DIE GRUENEN])
The "Stopp!"-sign which is to appear when one visits a indexed site, enables perpetrators to notice wether they have been discovered and have to change their address. The association of German detectives has justifiably ascertained: The search for perpetrators will be made more difficult by this law. That means that exactly what you actually want, colleague Mrs Noll - a goal we all have -, is going to be prevented.
I am very sad about it, that only a single expert was cited. All other experts such as professor Sieber from the renown Max-Planck-Institute for National and International Criminal Law have pointed out the considerable legal and technical problems. It was him, colleague Mrs Krogmann, who stimulated the dialog, which you are demanding, in the first place. Indeed: One should have held a dialog before arriving at such a law.
I have voted against this law because it suspends the separation of powers. For the first time the executive branch is controlling itself. The position at the commissary for data protection is - I have spoken about it already - not suitable for solving the problems springing up.
Obviously it is only about creating authorities and positions in spite of the German Federal Criminal Office Law. If I consider how many laws of this coalition have failed in the Federal Constitutional Court, I must say: I would have wished that one does not simply say: "Constitutionally everything is fine", but that one checks that thoroughly.
I have voted against this law because as I said with it surveillance structures are created. The Wall Street Journal has named - without justification in my opinion; but nevertheless; it shows, that it is being debatted internationally - Germany in one breath with China and Iran. I consider this to be extremeley problematical. But anyone who gets upset about it may look into that law. It is so that the providers are forced to negotiate with the police about technical guidelines. If one knows how the treaties where extorted from the providers - in a manner I have talked about earlier as well -, one can make it clear, what the problem is like: Here proliferation-prone technology is made available - proliferation-prone technology which can be gratefully accepted by all dictatorships of this world. That is irresponsible.
I have voted against this law, because the technology does not work in the closed circles of child pornographers, but it is able to filter democracy and freedom in many parts of the world.
I have voted against this law, because now additional treaties which have come into existence, in a manner as I have expressed before, are supposed
"Attach rate" should sound quite scornful to the customers. It is remarkable that these guys even have a technical term for the rate with which vendor lock-in progresses.
Collecting scenery videos, converting them to a polygon-based rendering engine, installing it on a server and then playing it using video-streaming sounds a bit retarded to me. You could just as well hire 1000 Chinese for their lifetime, give them Wireless cameras and send them into the jungle. Ok, it may be a bit costly. It will likely cost about $60 million... oh wait.
You took my comment out of context. Either you're trying to mis-represent what I said, or you didn't understand it.
I didn't take your comment out of context. Indeed it would be very difficult to take your comment out of context since you claim that code review is better in almost every case.
In my experience with TDD, if your test fails because you made design changes (or bug fixes), more often than not you end up fixing the faulty assumptions or design decisions in your test, and not changing the code to pass the erroneous test.
Changing your assumptions while doing a code review can happen even more easily since you can do it without being aware of it. You can see unit tests as a way of formalising your assumptions and making them testable. I didn't say that the programmer doesn't need to understand what he/she is doing. What I am saying is that you don't have a complete understanding of your program all the time. Making your assumptions testable is a technical means to address this problem.
TDD can catch those fine, but so can a good code review.
No. IMHO Test Driven Development is way better than code review. Code review requires human effort every time it is applied. Unit tests on the other hand can be performed by a computer whenever required. The reason why we are so entrenched into code reviews is that we are scared of unmaintainable and insufficiently documented code. However TDD provides a "safety-net" which gives you immediate feedback if you break the code while trying to fix design issues. Code review requires the team to have a complete understanding of the code and all possible inputs. TDD does not.
I guess the company has a website with a map where you use your mouse to mark a rectangular region to be demolished while Javascript interactively displays square meters and dollars in the top-left corner of the map. After checking out and paying with your credit card, you get a tracking ID which you can use to track the demolition status. Other countries will need decades of progress to reach this level of integration.
Slashdot Mirror
I started with Omikron Basic on Atari ST. The amazing thing with the Atari is, that graphics memory and main memory are one thing. Also there was no distinction between graphics-mode and text-mode. The only thing really limiting was the lack of dynamic memory allocation.
Today I can see that newcomers feel clued out because by default they are presented with a window manager and lots of user-friendly software which gets in the way if you are trying to get to the bottom of things.
When I switch on my computer, I get a screen for choosing an operating systems.
For proprietary software companies a copyright registration won't be a sufficient incentive to reveal the source code. They will just keep licensing binaries and use digital restriction management instead of the law to impose their rules on users.
... to add a firewall-rule fixing this issue.
I have a good idea on how to vet ideas without giving them away!
Fast cars, hot nightclubs, beautiful women... the professor designed them all.
They should invite McCarthy as well. He will all clobber them with LISP fragments.
The Linux community also requests that you don't charge a royalty or assert any patents covering driver code you are *not* contributing (such as "vfat.ko").
If you get your phone from a telecommunication provider it comes with SIMlock. If you get your E-Book reader from Amazon it comes with DRM. If you get your music player from Apple ....
There's plenty of good E-Book readers to choose from (unless you want one with Windows on it). Most of them support both DRM as well as DRM-free formats.
ANNND, any signficiant edits work of 1984 would have created a new derivitive work, with a whole new copyright.
I am looking forward to Amazon's digitally remastered edition of that book.
I wonder whether the hardware creates the anaglyph or whether the device actually appears as two separate cameras. I have tried to use two USB cameras simultaneously before and it's a nightmare. The images are not synchronised and some software drivers block one camera or the other.
Sorry. The link to the Iridium anomaly got screwed up. The Wikipedia editors like special characters in their URLs :(
Interesting idea. But what about the Iridium anomaly then?
You might have thought it would be better to fund development of mechanisms to prevent or mitigate DDoS attacks, rather than rely on using them. The bad guys will always be able to command more bots than any legal response could.
You also might have thought it would be better to prevent Microsoft Windows rather than using it. But I guess it's too late in both cases because the stuff is owned, licensed, and controlled by third parties.
Yeah. Let's all ask each other. That's gonna help!
In his investigation he tried to show that child porn is frequently distributed by mail order, telephone hotlines, and mobile phones again. However dealers of child porn usually require potential customers to break the law by providing illegal material themselves before trusting them.
In his hearing he admitted mistakes and he assured his innocence. He said that he had acted in the belief that he was permitted to perform such investigations as the responsible political authority.
I've translated a German transcript of his speech.
This is how we settle this matters in Kasachstan (forward video to 17:58).
"Attach rate" should sound quite scornful to the customers. It is remarkable that these guys even have a technical term for the rate with which vendor lock-in progresses.
I guess they found a much more lucrative application for parental controls.
Collecting scenery videos, converting them to a polygon-based rendering engine, installing it on a server and then playing it using video-streaming sounds a bit retarded to me. You could just as well hire 1000 Chinese for their lifetime, give them Wireless cameras and send them into the jungle. Ok, it may be a bit costly. It will likely cost about $60 million ... oh wait.
How is that recursive?
Queries make it possible:
http://www.google.com/search?q=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.bing.com%2Fsearch%3Fq%3Dgoogle
You took my comment out of context. Either you're trying to mis-represent what I said, or you didn't understand it.
I didn't take your comment out of context. Indeed it would be very difficult to take your comment out of context since you claim that code review is better in almost every case.
In my experience with TDD, if your test fails because you made design changes (or bug fixes), more often than not you end up fixing the faulty assumptions or design decisions in your test, and not changing the code to pass the erroneous test.
Changing your assumptions while doing a code review can happen even more easily since you can do it without being aware of it. You can see unit tests as a way of formalising your assumptions and making them testable. I didn't say that the programmer doesn't need to understand what he/she is doing. What I am saying is that you don't have a complete understanding of your program all the time. Making your assumptions testable is a technical means to address this problem.
TDD can catch those fine, but so can a good code review.
No. IMHO Test Driven Development is way better than code review. Code review requires human effort every time it is applied. Unit tests on the other hand can be performed by a computer whenever required. The reason why we are so entrenched into code reviews is that we are scared of unmaintainable and insufficiently documented code. However TDD provides a "safety-net" which gives you immediate feedback if you break the code while trying to fix design issues. Code review requires the team to have a complete understanding of the code and all possible inputs. TDD does not.
I guess the company has a website with a map where you use your mouse to mark a rectangular region to be demolished while Javascript interactively displays square meters and dollars in the top-left corner of the map. After checking out and paying with your credit card, you get a tracking ID which you can use to track the demolition status. Other countries will need decades of progress to reach this level of integration.