I think you missed the point. People want cross-platform GUIs, where the compiler/assembler/linker will automatically reshape the UI to fit the target device's HIG. More like saying "we've been using the internal combustion engine for decades in cars and motorcycles. If you want to increase horsepower, improve the fuel injection that's used in both." If someone comes up with an electric engine replacement, that's still not going to make a new car dashboard suddenly make sense on a kawasaki.
People have been walking using shoes for decades. Neither a horse nor a car helps you walk better; they just enable you to do less of it, in different ways.
And you're likely too far away from the NOC for AT&T DSL. Washington State screwed all rural residents with their agreements with Comcast and CenturyLink. See the article that hit the headlines yesterday as another example (municipal FTTH goes right past, but it's illegal to connect to it because that would compete with Comcast/CenturyLink, who don't actually provide service to the area but have dibs on deployment in the area). To make it worse, Comcast and CenturyLink get federal and state funding to call dibs on the areas they're providing no/bad service to. They keep getting the funding as long as those areas are on their "to do" list, even if they never do anything.
The FTTH NBN was supposed to address this, but then the Lib's decided that the old rotting copper is more than enough. I was lucky enough to get FTTH and while its pretty good its still only 100Mbps PPPoE so actual throughput is around 91Mbps and for some stupid reason outbound is capped at 40Mbps, doesn't make sense on fibre like it did on xDSL.
There are a few reasons for the outbound cap: 1) this allows them to separate consumer Internet from commercial hosting services Internet. You have to pay a bunch more to become a hosting service. This has nothing to do with network capability, and everything to do with marketing and sales. 2) AU has limited interconnects with the rest of the world. As such, it doesn't matter how fast the federal fibre network is, you're going to eventually hit the intercontinental cable and be competing with everyone else. This is why the Libs decided the rotting copper was more than enough -- totally ignoring the fact that a booming economy revolves around those *inside the country* having fast access to *each other* -- a blazing fast country-wide FTTH deployment with limited outside access would actually be optimal for growing the tech industry in AU. Kind of like Japan is doing.
Sad to say, you're probably dating yourself with the Great Pumpkin reference too.
My reason for not having a 6 digit UID is that for years I balked at registering on a social media site like Slashdot, but eventually I caved so that I could return to conversation threads instead of having to track through all the AC postings:)
End result is that I have to salt my account with probable but misleading information from time to time so that scraping my Slashdot posts isn't enough to identify who I am and where I shop. You have to at least also have my IP connection log for that;)
Same here... I ended up filling in a bit of detail on it too, so it's now my online CV. However, I don't use it like a social network, just as a place for people to find my employment info.
Facebook? Never had an account, never plan to, and never missed it. My social life is already busy enough without it thank you.
Which is the smart thing to do -- offload data storage to some external less mutable source that's available 24/7. Sure -- the source content could change/vanish -- but at least there are checksums and validation methods available. Inside your brain? Not so much. I don't really see this as an issue, more of a feature. Save your brain for managing the pointers and handling the data that's actually important to everyday life.
Precisely. Who is smarter: someone who tries to keep a whole domain of knowledge in their head just in case they need part of it, or someone who knows where to find the information in ANY domain and critically analyse it for accuracy?
It seems to me that the study missed the mark: what they SHOULD have been studying was whether Google increases or decreases people's ability to think critically about a subject. It's possible that people put the blind faith in Google that they used to put in academic journals or newspapers. However, people have always done this for the most part.
I'd say that someone has the right to consider themselves smarter if they know how to find accurate information on the Internet vs. someone who doesn't -- because increasingly, everyone has access to all kinds of information on the internet and depends on it for day-to-day life.
Doing this would limit technical development to projects that could be completed within 4 years (4 years to bring to market, 1 year to recoup costs). This doesn't really give enough time for copyright to promote the sciences and useful arts -- even in the computer software realm.
Currently, 14 years is around one generation in the computer/tech world. So copyright would give them a monopoly on the right to copy their creation for one generation, and then get out of the way for the next generation to build on top of it. This is the way US copyright was supposed to work (as opposed to UK copyright for example, which was the Crown's way of granting favors and limiting the spread of information).
The whole concept of introducing the life of the artist has always seemed like a bad idea to me -- it means that if you shorten the artist's life, there's a potential for earlier release into the public domain -- which is why to fix this, they added an extra 40 years, so there would be no immediate benefit to killing someone to release their copywritten work.
However, with corporations able to hold copyrights now, things get even trickier -- plus, we now have works made up of licensed works belonging to others. Because of life + 70, this becomes a nightmare to untangle without making a mistake, so most places just don't bother, and treat all works as if they were under perpetual copyright, and complex works as if derivatives could never be made of them, ever.
The result of THIS is abandonware, where you have people releasing source code and binaries for software where they *probably* hold the copyright, but nobody's sure as the company who held it all together no longer exists, and has possibly sold off its copyright assets, but not for sure. Because nobody's sure, nobody is likely to sue over the work being made available, and if someone eventually does, people just stop copying.
As far as game consoles needing to die/being a ripoff: if they're a ripoff, then don't buy them, and they'll die. Obviously, enough people find them to be worth purchasing to keep them going. For everyone else, there's Angry Birds.
claiming something doesn't make it false -- in this case it would be true.
However, the gear isn't theirs -- as I originally pointed out, it's the company's, which is why it is being respected as the company's gear, and is being reimaged to be in compliance with company policy.
However, this doesn't work as well with BYOD, which is increasingly common. In those cases, you need other ways of fencing off company data from personal data.
Ah; but 1) I don't stand on the female golfer at all and 2) I *can* have it both ways, as these things are open to context and interpretation.
Since there's really nothing differentiating a male golfer from a female golfer other than gender, I see no problem with her joining. On the other hand, there's lots of other clubs she could have joined.
So I'm on both sides, and feel that they should have been able to amicably work it out between them instead of bringing it to court. There are always exceptions to the rules.
The point here is that in order to sell new games, they would need to advance the progress of science and the useful arts. That's what copyright is all about.
A new game that's like an old game, but can run on different hardware, with slightly improved graphics, slightly improved sound, and in-game purchases, does not advance the progress of science and the useful arts.
Basically, history shows that people are willing to pay for products that achieve what copyright sets out to achieve. People tend to find alternate ways of preserving their societal history when copyright is used as a means of artificial monopoly for the sake of holding our social heritage hostage.
This one's easy: Nintendo still sells games. They're afraid that if people start playing conversions of their old games (or even just start watching videos of other people playing old games), they'll have no incentive to go out and by their newer games/consoles.
The reality probably includes that, but also includes the fact that since IP goes so deep, any Nintendo games are likely to include IP licensed from others, with specific contract details outlining how the IP can be used. If some third party starts duplicating/redistributing this IP, things get messy.
Not the way it *should* be, but it's the way it *is*. Shortening copyright to 14 years for digital works would fix a lot of this.
I think you've just proven that it's good advice in the UK too -- because if the email is personal rather than business, you will be in a lot of trouble via the privacy act if you let those personal emails fall into the hands of the co-workers of the individual who left. So you MUST back up everything (without looking at it to see what's personal and what isn't) and MUST then clear out all the personal email before allowing other co-workers to look at the archive. Failure to do either is a criminal offense in the UK.
You summed this up nicely -- including my propensity to use closely matched mnemonic clauses:) I almost switched from "on the company time" to "the company's business" but it sounded clunky, and I figured everyone already knew what I was talking about and just needed a friendly reminder.
Obviously at least one person needed it spelled out in more detail:)
Security is already done or not when the notice goes in... but shutting off access, as the GP pointed out, is done as a simulated test environment. Basically, it's a "What would things be like if he wasn't here?" while he's still around to help out if it turns out something was missed. The alternative is assuming that everyone has a perfect memory and that all systems have been adjusted appropriately, all project migrated properly, and no further questions need to be asked (in which case, why not give him 2 weeks paid vacation, if he isn't needed anymore?).
And beyond this... if it's on the company computer, it's on the company's time, and is the company's business. A lot of people forget this and use company systems for personal stuff, but it's still company data, and has been proven to be so in court.
So yeah; back up everything now, and then provide a sanitized version for others to look through as need arises.
The truth is, even if there's something critical in the backup, it's likely that nobody will ever know its there and so have reason to go looking for it. But CYA is always important for IT.
Yeah; it's really about developmental psychology (feed your kids well while their brains are forming, and they'll work better), but the discussion will devolve into head size jokes before you know it.
Now that that's out of the way... I've got devices from 2009. I can't find any way to even trade them in.
Back in 2011, I had an iOS device failure out of warranty, and I got a $50 value for bringing in the back cover of my previous device. Didn't need to bring in the rest, just the back cover, and I got $50 off the replacement. This probably kept me from going with an Android device at the time, and now I'm locked into the iOS App walled garden.
So not sure about how they've adjusted the program now, but the old way definitely has affected my buying decisions.
Well why not automate the process? SCIgen should just subscribe to the SciDetect source repo, and auto-update its copy when the trunk updates. SciDetect should then subscribe to the SCIgen source repo, and ensure that it detects any newly missed sets.
Leave this system alone for a while, and we won't need to write articles anymore, as SCIgen should do a better job of producing insightful but unintelligible drivel than you'd get from any peer-reviewed journal -- and it would detect itself to boot!
Slashdot Mirror
Somehow it's hard to take Delphi seriously......
...I always thought that Oracle should have bought Borland instead of Sun....
I think you missed the point. People want cross-platform GUIs, where the compiler/assembler/linker will automatically reshape the UI to fit the target device's HIG. More like saying "we've been using the internal combustion engine for decades in cars and motorcycles. If you want to increase horsepower, improve the fuel injection that's used in both." If someone comes up with an electric engine replacement, that's still not going to make a new car dashboard suddenly make sense on a kawasaki.
People have been walking using shoes for decades. Neither a horse nor a car helps you walk better; they just enable you to do less of it, in different ways.
And you're likely too far away from the NOC for AT&T DSL. Washington State screwed all rural residents with their agreements with Comcast and CenturyLink. See the article that hit the headlines yesterday as another example (municipal FTTH goes right past, but it's illegal to connect to it because that would compete with Comcast/CenturyLink, who don't actually provide service to the area but have dibs on deployment in the area). To make it worse, Comcast and CenturyLink get federal and state funding to call dibs on the areas they're providing no/bad service to. They keep getting the funding as long as those areas are on their "to do" list, even if they never do anything.
Oh, they stopped all broadband investment; this is purely marketing investment at this point.
The FTTH NBN was supposed to address this, but then the Lib's decided that the old rotting copper is more than enough. I was lucky enough to get FTTH and while its pretty good its still only 100Mbps PPPoE so actual throughput is around 91Mbps and for some stupid reason outbound is capped at 40Mbps, doesn't make sense on fibre like it did on xDSL.
There are a few reasons for the outbound cap:
1) this allows them to separate consumer Internet from commercial hosting services Internet. You have to pay a bunch more to become a hosting service. This has nothing to do with network capability, and everything to do with marketing and sales.
2) AU has limited interconnects with the rest of the world. As such, it doesn't matter how fast the federal fibre network is, you're going to eventually hit the intercontinental cable and be competing with everyone else. This is why the Libs decided the rotting copper was more than enough -- totally ignoring the fact that a booming economy revolves around those *inside the country* having fast access to *each other* -- a blazing fast country-wide FTTH deployment with limited outside access would actually be optimal for growing the tech industry in AU. Kind of like Japan is doing.
Sad to say, you're probably dating yourself with the Great Pumpkin reference too.
My reason for not having a 6 digit UID is that for years I balked at registering on a social media site like Slashdot, but eventually I caved so that I could return to conversation threads instead of having to track through all the AC postings :)
End result is that I have to salt my account with probable but misleading information from time to time so that scraping my Slashdot posts isn't enough to identify who I am and where I shop. You have to at least also have my IP connection log for that ;)
I'd like to know why people consider Facebook to be the epitome of social media when Slashdot's been in the business for way longer.
Really... take a look at someone's profile on here sometime. You can learn a lot about a Slashdotter with an account. No need for Facebook.
Not to mention the fact that Slashdot accounts get ranked at the top of search results....
Same here... I ended up filling in a bit of detail on it too, so it's now my online CV. However, I don't use it like a social network, just as a place for people to find my employment info.
Facebook? Never had an account, never plan to, and never missed it. My social life is already busy enough without it thank you.
Better deal than you'd have got dining with Sartre's Demon....
Which is the smart thing to do -- offload data storage to some external less mutable source that's available 24/7. Sure -- the source content could change/vanish -- but at least there are checksums and validation methods available. Inside your brain? Not so much. I don't really see this as an issue, more of a feature. Save your brain for managing the pointers and handling the data that's actually important to everyday life.
Precisely. Who is smarter: someone who tries to keep a whole domain of knowledge in their head just in case they need part of it, or someone who knows where to find the information in ANY domain and critically analyse it for accuracy?
It seems to me that the study missed the mark: what they SHOULD have been studying was whether Google increases or decreases people's ability to think critically about a subject. It's possible that people put the blind faith in Google that they used to put in academic journals or newspapers. However, people have always done this for the most part.
I'd say that someone has the right to consider themselves smarter if they know how to find accurate information on the Internet vs. someone who doesn't -- because increasingly, everyone has access to all kinds of information on the internet and depends on it for day-to-day life.
Doing this would limit technical development to projects that could be completed within 4 years (4 years to bring to market, 1 year to recoup costs). This doesn't really give enough time for copyright to promote the sciences and useful arts -- even in the computer software realm.
Currently, 14 years is around one generation in the computer/tech world. So copyright would give them a monopoly on the right to copy their creation for one generation, and then get out of the way for the next generation to build on top of it. This is the way US copyright was supposed to work (as opposed to UK copyright for example, which was the Crown's way of granting favors and limiting the spread of information).
The whole concept of introducing the life of the artist has always seemed like a bad idea to me -- it means that if you shorten the artist's life, there's a potential for earlier release into the public domain -- which is why to fix this, they added an extra 40 years, so there would be no immediate benefit to killing someone to release their copywritten work.
However, with corporations able to hold copyrights now, things get even trickier -- plus, we now have works made up of licensed works belonging to others. Because of life + 70, this becomes a nightmare to untangle without making a mistake, so most places just don't bother, and treat all works as if they were under perpetual copyright, and complex works as if derivatives could never be made of them, ever.
The result of THIS is abandonware, where you have people releasing source code and binaries for software where they *probably* hold the copyright, but nobody's sure as the company who held it all together no longer exists, and has possibly sold off its copyright assets, but not for sure. Because nobody's sure, nobody is likely to sue over the work being made available, and if someone eventually does, people just stop copying.
As far as game consoles needing to die/being a ripoff: if they're a ripoff, then don't buy them, and they'll die. Obviously, enough people find them to be worth purchasing to keep them going. For everyone else, there's Angry Birds.
claiming something doesn't make it false -- in this case it would be true.
However, the gear isn't theirs -- as I originally pointed out, it's the company's, which is why it is being respected as the company's gear, and is being reimaged to be in compliance with company policy.
However, this doesn't work as well with BYOD, which is increasingly common. In those cases, you need other ways of fencing off company data from personal data.
Ah; but 1) I don't stand on the female golfer at all
and 2) I *can* have it both ways, as these things are open to context and interpretation.
Since there's really nothing differentiating a male golfer from a female golfer other than gender, I see no problem with her joining. On the other hand, there's lots of other clubs she could have joined.
So I'm on both sides, and feel that they should have been able to amicably work it out between them instead of bringing it to court. There are always exceptions to the rules.
The point here is that in order to sell new games, they would need to advance the progress of science and the useful arts. That's what copyright is all about.
A new game that's like an old game, but can run on different hardware, with slightly improved graphics, slightly improved sound, and in-game purchases, does not advance the progress of science and the useful arts.
Basically, history shows that people are willing to pay for products that achieve what copyright sets out to achieve. People tend to find alternate ways of preserving their societal history when copyright is used as a means of artificial monopoly for the sake of holding our social heritage hostage.
This one's easy: Nintendo still sells games. They're afraid that if people start playing conversions of their old games (or even just start watching videos of other people playing old games), they'll have no incentive to go out and by their newer games/consoles.
The reality probably includes that, but also includes the fact that since IP goes so deep, any Nintendo games are likely to include IP licensed from others, with specific contract details outlining how the IP can be used. If some third party starts duplicating/redistributing this IP, things get messy.
Not the way it *should* be, but it's the way it *is*. Shortening copyright to 14 years for digital works would fix a lot of this.
I think you've just proven that it's good advice in the UK too -- because if the email is personal rather than business, you will be in a lot of trouble via the privacy act if you let those personal emails fall into the hands of the co-workers of the individual who left. So you MUST back up everything (without looking at it to see what's personal and what isn't) and MUST then clear out all the personal email before allowing other co-workers to look at the archive. Failure to do either is a criminal offense in the UK.
You summed this up nicely -- including my propensity to use closely matched mnemonic clauses :) I almost switched from "on the company time" to "the company's business" but it sounded clunky, and I figured everyone already knew what I was talking about and just needed a friendly reminder.
Obviously at least one person needed it spelled out in more detail :)
Security is already done or not when the notice goes in... but shutting off access, as the GP pointed out, is done as a simulated test environment. Basically, it's a "What would things be like if he wasn't here?" while he's still around to help out if it turns out something was missed. The alternative is assuming that everyone has a perfect memory and that all systems have been adjusted appropriately, all project migrated properly, and no further questions need to be asked (in which case, why not give him 2 weeks paid vacation, if he isn't needed anymore?).
And beyond this... if it's on the company computer, it's on the company's time, and is the company's business. A lot of people forget this and use company systems for personal stuff, but it's still company data, and has been proven to be so in court.
So yeah; back up everything now, and then provide a sanitized version for others to look through as need arises.
The truth is, even if there's something critical in the backup, it's likely that nobody will ever know its there and so have reason to go looking for it. But CYA is always important for IT.
Yeah; it's really about developmental psychology (feed your kids well while their brains are forming, and they'll work better), but the discussion will devolve into head size jokes before you know it.
http://store.apple.com/us/brow...
Now that that's out of the way... I've got devices from 2009. I can't find any way to even trade them in.
Back in 2011, I had an iOS device failure out of warranty, and I got a $50 value for bringing in the back cover of my previous device. Didn't need to bring in the rest, just the back cover, and I got $50 off the replacement. This probably kept me from going with an Android device at the time, and now I'm locked into the iOS App walled garden.
So not sure about how they've adjusted the program now, but the old way definitely has affected my buying decisions.
Well why not automate the process? SCIgen should just subscribe to the SciDetect source repo, and auto-update its copy when the trunk updates. SciDetect should then subscribe to the SCIgen source repo, and ensure that it detects any newly missed sets.
Leave this system alone for a while, and we won't need to write articles anymore, as SCIgen should do a better job of producing insightful but unintelligible drivel than you'd get from any peer-reviewed journal -- and it would detect itself to boot!
Whoosh?
You did hear the news that Australia is attempting to ban proxies/VPN use, right? So your 'solution' may soon be illegal in Australia.