Who appointed them has little to do with how "conservative" they are. Point-of-fact: JPS is universally regarded as the most liberal judge on the bench. Souter is also considered far-left of center. So, for those keeping score, the 4 most leftwing judges voted for this mess.
And people thought Bush wouldn't accomplish anything in office...
Fuck off! Bush appointed exactly zero (yes, nada, garnish, zippo) of those judges, so take your knee-jerk bush-bashing somewhere else.
As an aside, the justices who ruled in favor of this case are all on the far left of the political spectrum, and, as leftists, were just looking to expand the power of the state, not corporations (which obviously your big bugaboo).
What a giant steaming load of crap.
I can ignore all of your spoon-fed anti-American bullshit (after all, you're just parroting what your teachers drummed into your head), but your "China is just different from the US, so let them do their own thing" statement is just relativistic evil. "China has the right to censor and imprison dissenters because it's the Chinese way?" By your thinking, Hitler's gas ovens were just the German peoples' way of doing things so we had no right to interfere. Cambodia's reeducation camps were just an Asian way of solving an overpopulation problem so what right did us Caucasian people have to complain?
You useless pile of human garbage. You make me ashamed to be an American.
Ummm...don't you hosers pay a surcharge (also known as "protection money") to the RIAA for every freaking blank tape and CD-R sold? Whether or not said media is used to store music?
You have a very warped idea of what capitalism is (probably from years of getting your skull filled with public-school mush). The basic tenent of capitalism is that if you don't give the customer what he wants, he goes elsewhere. Monopolies of course allow you to break that rule, but (aside from the fact that monopolies are actually antithetical to capitalism), this ship would have no monopoly on employing programmers.
Do you get it now? If the employer were to overcharge for the company store, room and board, etc., they just wouldn't have any employees. (Or at least they'd be stuck with people who were too incompetent to get a job elswhere, and how long would they stay around running a business staffed with rejects?)
Also, XML is a meta-markup language. And it's copyrighted. Additionally, any given XML document can be copyrighted (so you're wrong about it not being an enforceable copyright). And, XML *schemas* (i.e., DTDs) can be copyrighted.
So, basically your entire post was "-1 NOT informative".
Let it go. The *specification* IS copyrighted, irregardless of its presentation, not the freaking web page. Once more for the cheap seats, THE XML SPECIFICATION IS COPYRIGHTED.
If it was not copyrighted, people could, for example, add freaky tag behavior like </BORK/> and call it "XML Extreme". CF., w3c's note: "5.5 I really like the HTML 3.2 specification, but would like to make some changes, may I modify the 3.2 specification in a few places and redistribute it? May I call it HTML 3.2.1?
No and no."
Liberal translator alert: "spew" = "say something that cannot be easily ignored with convenient namecalling"
"extremely right-wing"? WTF? One sure hallmark of a left-wing president is if he increases domestic spending: GWB has increased domestic spending faster than any president since JFK. He's enacted the largest entitlement program (prescription drugs) since Johnson. He's *never* vetoed a bill, and has shown a marked predilection for increasing the size of the federal government at every possible opportunity.
Please provide me with data to back up your assertion that GWB is "extremely right-wing".
Not intendending to be sarcastic -- I'm just curious: Software *has* to be different than cars somehow, right? Otherwise, why haven't people been suing MS et al. into oblivion over the last 30 years, as has been done to auto and (especially) small plane manufacturers?
In my mind, you are a little tenuous in asserting that software disputes are the domain of the courts.
OK, riight. Thing is, if the code crashes, whose fault is it?
This happened today: customer calls claiming my software is broken -- he's getting "invalid opcode" messages trying to run the thing. Well, noone else gets the same message. Turns out he's running the software on some crap 386. So, is it my software, or: a) an old Windows95 so loaded up with spyware, viruses, registry crap from software uninstalled 5 years ago, outdated network clients, etc. that it takes 5 minutes to boot, or b) bad hardware (memory going bad, drive cache toasted, etc.) or is it my software?
How can you prove in court that these kinds of problems are due to the software and not due to user error and/or incompetence in operating their computers?
It's akin to suing GM because your 50-year old car has bad brakes.
That's a very open-ended statement. Exactly *how* could Borland profit? Sell service contracts? OK, so that would (maybe) make some money (I'd argue that it would be *substantially* less than would could be had selling software), but does it encourage R&D on new products? No way. Borland outsources the service contracts to India and lets all of its programmers go.
So, the end result of your naieve (and cheap) desire to get Borland's nifty stuff for free is that Borland's programmers get unemployed and in the span of a few years you are stuck with a bunch of unimproved, clunky and outdated software products.
Look, I use Borland's stuff and I like it. I don't mind paying them for it either because they help *me* make money. Until you (or someone) can come up with a solid, concrete business plan that makes money by giving things away, I'll continue to pay (and charge) for software.
Sure, Borland could do this, but why? Remember, corporations exist for the *sole* purpose of making money for their stockholders. How does giving away proprietary IP (which cost shedloads of money to research and develop) serve Borland's shareholders? I'd call doing this breach of fiduciary responsibility.
There are organizations that exist to give stuff away -- they're called nonprofits.
We're really being off-topic here -- as noted in earlier posts, IBM's giving away something that they can no longer profit from (as Borland did with the TC line); you're asking Borland to give something away that would directly cut into their own profits and cost their shareholders money.
By the way, Borland *does* give away their current compiler and "personal" versions of their IDE (see http://borland.com/products/downloads/download_cbu ilder.html).
I'd say that Borland's stockholders would not think that would be great. Probably Borland's programmers wouldn't either -- how do you expect Borland to survive as a company if all of their products are given away? (Please don't say "sell service contracts" -- how many programmers does it take to fulfill service contracts?)
Open source has its place (hey, I'm writing this on Firefox), but people who want a viable company to give away its products are either economically naive (to put it delicately), willfully ignorant or malicious (i.e., you're hoping Borland fails as a company so's their software becomes abandonware).
Well, maybe a legitimate *interest*, but...a letitimate *mandate*? How is it that the Constitution (you know, that thing that everybody and their paid lobbyist uses for a doormat these days) gives Washington the power to mandate commercial rocketry?
Hmmm...did anybody say "commerce clause"?
Could any lawyers out there (or those playing ones on TV) explain to me whether the Constitution's interstate commerce clause could be used to regulate a rocket that doesn't cross state lines (after all, the thing goes straight up).
Or is this just a case of Congress ignoring any particular mandate and just pulling the regulating power out of thin air?
"Your government cares far more about your personal happiness and success..."
Riiiight. I personally see examples of this every time I go to the DMV, apply for a construction permit, get strip searched by the TSA, have my land confiscated and given to a developer to build a stip mall, smoke a joint, try to fire a drunken employee, stand through a tax audit, etc. et fucking c.
Do you have any idea what the hell it is that you're talking about? Aside from the IIS bug, wtf would a DMZ matter?
Seriously, we're talking about a worm that spreads via freaking network shares. What are you thinking...that each Windows machine live in its own DMZ?
Or maybe you're just talking out of your ass...
Re:a series of well planned coincidences.
on
Dive Into Python
·
· Score: 1
Pragmatic Programmer is, well...more pragmatic. Good real-life advice. For me, it was right up there with Design Patterns, Code Complete and About Face in terms of changing the way I approach programming.
But, you're right: different tastes=good. I know many other people enjoy Practice of Programming so maybe it's just me...
Re:a series of well planned coincidences.
on
Dive Into Python
·
· Score: 1
Unfortunately I have. The authors have no humor and a totally unengaging style, and the book comes across nothing more than a long apology for C. It's full of pointless trivia on the language-of-choice for the PDP-11 -- completely uninteresting to anyone working in a more modern environment. (Oh, but the little weiner dog on the cover is cute.)
Try The Pragmatic Programmer for a more up-to-date and interesting "craft of programming" book, especially if you are fortunate enough to not be stuck working with creaky old C.
Exactly! That's really where Miscrosoft falls flat: their frickin' error messages. They started out with those helpful "general error #20" stupidities in response to dos command problems (still exist, at least with NET commands; e.g., "System error 67 has occurred" -- what moron thought that up?) and proceeded all the way to their amazingly pointless messages provided by various scripting stuff (VB's "TYPE MISMATCH" message: what type? what code line? what module?).
Their error messages, more than any other facet of MS software, demonstrates their total lack of empathy for end-users.
You fucking idiot. What motivation would someone have in a socialist country to become a medical researcher?
10 years of schooling & internship, just so he can live exactly the same life as the drunken, unemployed slob down the hall in his "Socialist Worker's Paradise Tenement Complex"?
Take your stinking commie leanings and export them and yourself to a Worker's Paradise like North Korea.
The only cure some shit-hole of a socialst country like Cuba has for cancer is a bullet in the back of the head.
Slashdot Mirror
Who appointed them has little to do with how "conservative" they are. Point-of-fact: JPS is universally regarded as the most liberal judge on the bench. Souter is also considered far-left of center. So, for those keeping score, the 4 most leftwing judges voted for this mess.
And people thought Bush wouldn't accomplish anything in office...
Fuck off! Bush appointed exactly zero (yes, nada, garnish, zippo) of those judges, so take your knee-jerk bush-bashing somewhere else.
As an aside, the justices who ruled in favor of this case are all on the far left of the political spectrum, and, as leftists, were just looking to expand the power of the state, not corporations (which obviously your big bugaboo).
What a giant steaming load of crap. I can ignore all of your spoon-fed anti-American bullshit (after all, you're just parroting what your teachers drummed into your head), but your "China is just different from the US, so let them do their own thing" statement is just relativistic evil. "China has the right to censor and imprison dissenters because it's the Chinese way?" By your thinking, Hitler's gas ovens were just the German peoples' way of doing things so we had no right to interfere. Cambodia's reeducation camps were just an Asian way of solving an overpopulation problem so what right did us Caucasian people have to complain? You useless pile of human garbage. You make me ashamed to be an American.
Ummm...don't you hosers pay a surcharge (also known as "protection money") to the RIAA for every freaking blank tape and CD-R sold? Whether or not said media is used to store music?
F-ing A! indeed.
You have a very warped idea of what capitalism is (probably from years of getting your skull filled with public-school mush). The basic tenent of capitalism is that if you don't give the customer what he wants, he goes elsewhere. Monopolies of course allow you to break that rule, but (aside from the fact that monopolies are actually antithetical to capitalism), this ship would have no monopoly on employing programmers.
Do you get it now? If the employer were to overcharge for the company store, room and board, etc., they just wouldn't have any employees. (Or at least they'd be stuck with people who were too incompetent to get a job elswhere, and how long would they stay around running a business staffed with rejects?)
Also, XML is a meta-markup language. And it's copyrighted. Additionally, any given XML document can be copyrighted (so you're wrong about it not being an enforceable copyright). And, XML *schemas* (i.e., DTDs) can be copyrighted.
So, basically your entire post was "-1 NOT informative".
Nice spelling though.
Oh, you're saying the *web page* is copyrighted?
Let it go. The *specification* IS copyrighted, irregardless of its presentation, not the freaking web page. Once more for the cheap seats, THE XML SPECIFICATION IS COPYRIGHTED.
See for example this.
If it was not copyrighted, people could, for example, add freaky tag behavior like </BORK/> and call it "XML Extreme". CF., w3c's note: "5.5 I really like the HTML 3.2 specification, but would like to make some changes, may I modify the 3.2 specification in a few places and redistribute it? May I call it HTML 3.2.1? No and no."
"XML is an open standard developed from UML"???
;)
Err...I think you have your "ML"'s mixed up buddy. You mean "SGML", right?
Or did they just use a lot of class diagrams when developing XML?
Liberal translator alert: "spew" = "say something that cannot be easily ignored with convenient namecalling"
"extremely right-wing"? WTF? One sure hallmark of a left-wing president is if he increases domestic spending: GWB has increased domestic spending faster than any president since JFK. He's enacted the largest entitlement program (prescription drugs) since Johnson. He's *never* vetoed a bill, and has shown a marked predilection for increasing the size of the federal government at every possible opportunity.
Please provide me with data to back up your assertion that GWB is "extremely right-wing".
Not intendending to be sarcastic -- I'm just curious: Software *has* to be different than cars somehow, right? Otherwise, why haven't people been suing MS et al. into oblivion over the last 30 years, as has been done to auto and (especially) small plane manufacturers? In my mind, you are a little tenuous in asserting that software disputes are the domain of the courts.
And how is a court of law to determine this? Google "junk science"+lawsuit to see how guillable courts are when it comes to culpability.
OK, riight. Thing is, if the code crashes, whose fault is it?
This happened today: customer calls claiming my software is broken -- he's getting "invalid opcode" messages trying to run the thing. Well, noone else gets the same message. Turns out he's running the software on some crap 386. So, is it my software, or: a) an old Windows95 so loaded up with spyware, viruses, registry crap from software uninstalled 5 years ago, outdated network clients, etc. that it takes 5 minutes to boot, or b) bad hardware (memory going bad, drive cache toasted, etc.) or is it my software?
How can you prove in court that these kinds of problems are due to the software and not due to user error and/or incompetence in operating their computers?
It's akin to suing GM because your 50-year old car has bad brakes.
That's a very open-ended statement. Exactly *how* could Borland profit? Sell service contracts? OK, so that would (maybe) make some money (I'd argue that it would be *substantially* less than would could be had selling software), but does it encourage R&D on new products? No way. Borland outsources the service contracts to India and lets all of its programmers go.
So, the end result of your naieve (and cheap) desire to get Borland's nifty stuff for free is that Borland's programmers get unemployed and in the span of a few years you are stuck with a bunch of unimproved, clunky and outdated software products.
Look, I use Borland's stuff and I like it. I don't mind paying them for it either because they help *me* make money. Until you (or someone) can come up with a solid, concrete business plan that makes money by giving things away, I'll continue to pay (and charge) for software.
Sure, Borland could do this, but why? Remember, corporations exist for the *sole* purpose of making money for their stockholders. How does giving away proprietary IP (which cost shedloads of money to research and develop) serve Borland's shareholders? I'd call doing this breach of fiduciary responsibility.
u ilder.html).
There are organizations that exist to give stuff away -- they're called nonprofits.
We're really being off-topic here -- as noted in earlier posts, IBM's giving away something that they can no longer profit from (as Borland did with the TC line); you're asking Borland to give something away that would directly cut into their own profits and cost their shareholders money.
By the way, Borland *does* give away their current compiler and "personal" versions of their IDE (see http://borland.com/products/downloads/download_cb
I'd say that Borland's stockholders would not think that would be great. Probably Borland's programmers wouldn't either -- how do you expect Borland to survive as a company if all of their products are given away? (Please don't say "sell service contracts" -- how many programmers does it take to fulfill service contracts?)
Open source has its place (hey, I'm writing this on Firefox), but people who want a viable company to give away its products are either economically naive (to put it delicately), willfully ignorant or malicious (i.e., you're hoping Borland fails as a company so's their software becomes abandonware).
Well, maybe a legitimate *interest*, but...a letitimate *mandate*? How is it that the Constitution (you know, that thing that everybody and their paid lobbyist uses for a doormat these days) gives Washington the power to mandate commercial rocketry?
Hmmm...did anybody say "commerce clause"?
Could any lawyers out there (or those playing ones on TV) explain to me whether the Constitution's interstate commerce clause could be used to regulate a rocket that doesn't cross state lines (after all, the thing goes straight up).
Or is this just a case of Congress ignoring any particular mandate and just pulling the regulating power out of thin air?
Actually, the pilot has admitted to being the cause of the spin (he said he may have stepped on a rudder control).
"Your government cares far more about your personal happiness and success..."
Riiiight. I personally see examples of this every time I go to the DMV, apply for a construction permit, get strip searched by the TSA, have my land confiscated and given to a developer to build a stip mall, smoke a joint, try to fire a drunken employee, stand through a tax audit, etc. et fucking c.
You, sir, are an idiot.
Do you have any idea what the hell it is that you're talking about? Aside from the IIS bug, wtf would a DMZ matter? Seriously, we're talking about a worm that spreads via freaking network shares. What are you thinking...that each Windows machine live in its own DMZ? Or maybe you're just talking out of your ass...
Pragmatic Programmer is, well...more pragmatic. Good real-life advice. For me, it was right up there with Design Patterns, Code Complete and About Face in terms of changing the way I approach programming.
But, you're right: different tastes=good. I know many other people enjoy Practice of Programming so maybe it's just me...
Unfortunately I have. The authors have no humor and a totally unengaging style, and the book comes across nothing more than a long apology for C. It's full of pointless trivia on the language-of-choice for the PDP-11 -- completely uninteresting to anyone working in a more modern environment. (Oh, but the little weiner dog on the cover is cute.)
Try The Pragmatic Programmer for a more up-to-date and interesting "craft of programming" book, especially if you are fortunate enough to not be stuck working with creaky old C.
Did you even RTFA?
How's this for counter-arguments you idiot.
Exactly! That's really where Miscrosoft falls flat: their frickin' error messages. They started out with those helpful "general error #20" stupidities in response to dos command problems (still exist, at least with NET commands; e.g., "System error 67 has occurred" -- what moron thought that up?) and proceeded all the way to their amazingly pointless messages provided by various scripting stuff (VB's "TYPE MISMATCH" message: what type? what code line? what module?).
Their error messages, more than any other facet of MS software, demonstrates their total lack of empathy for end-users.
You fucking idiot. What motivation would someone have in a socialist country to become a medical researcher?
10 years of schooling & internship, just so he can live exactly the same life as the drunken, unemployed slob down the hall in his "Socialist Worker's Paradise Tenement Complex"?
Take your stinking commie leanings and export them and yourself to a Worker's Paradise like North Korea.
The only cure some shit-hole of a socialst country like Cuba has for cancer is a bullet in the back of the head.