In Japan, the first party to file for the patent is the person who is granted the patent, not the first person to invent. It's this way is most countries but not the US.
I don't think that it's common sense. Google isn't going to rely on one source of income. They currently have other ways of making money besides ad revenue including their search appliances and Google Answers. Ads make up a majority of that income but they've been at that longer. They'll deversify their income. There's no reason to believe that they could have done this from the start with another source of revenue other than ads. So I still stand by my assertion that there could have been, and probably would have been, a Google if they had not pursued revenue from ads.
It is obvious that this guy should have had an anti-virus package active
I think a better question is that when computers are so pervasive and so integrated into the mechanisms of our daily lives, why isn't there a standard of quality for software and hardware enforced by the government? We have lemon laws for vehicles. Car companies could never get away with the type of anti-warranty that software publishers such as Microsoft currently enjoy. I'm surprised that some attorneys have not gone after Microsoft and other companies for negligence.
It's incidents like this that is leading us towards having to be licenced to write software much like architects and engineers are licensed to practice their trade. We may be another 10-20 years away from that but unless software developers get their act together it's going to come sooner than we all think.
Theres always a big bruhaha whenever MS comes out with a product or feature not 100% origional and unique. Why ignore it when OSS does it (and blantantly so)?
Because OSS doesn't try to draw attention it itself as a great innovator. Microsoft takes credit for damn near everything in the computing world and act as if they had thought of it. In most cases they are either behind the curve or have bought another company that did the innovating before the buyout. Microsoft twists the facts or is outright dishonest about their innovation. The bruhaha is because people are calling them on it.
After experiencing it at work, at home, and hearing about it from friends and family, users become used to it and even expect it. "Computers crash and get infected. That's just a fact of life," they say. To most users it's normal because they don't know any better and haven't discovered or tried any alternatives.
A good point. However, if you are paying $30,000 for an Oracle license you need to renegotiate your contract. That's far too much for a single instance.
In any case, I work for a pharmaceutical company of about 60,000 people. We have a global contract for Oracle that includes support so deploying another Oracle box is of little cost to us overall. The place where we are using Oracle on Debian are places where we'd be unlikely to use Oracle's support. In fact, these are places where PostgreSQL, or even MySQL, would probably be sufficient. However, Oracle is the company mandated database standard and that's what we have to use. There isn't any such standard for Unix systems so we use Debian where it makes sense. It also helps that our DBA is top-notch having administrated Oracle on both Unix and Windows for many years.
Having said that, most of the Oracle instances throughout the company do run on Oracle approved OS's such as AIX or Windows. Those usually have a much more complex setup such as failover or clustering. They also house more mission critical databases.
In any case, the point of my original post was to refute the parent poster's comment that Oracle doesn't run on Debian. It does, and it runs well.
Oracle runs great on Debian. I have two Oracle 9 production boxes running Debian Sarge and a third machine with Debian and Oracle 10 for some development and testing work. In addition to that I have lots of Debian (and RedHat) boxes that have the Oracle client software installed. We use Oracle for some internal company web sites and several bioinformatics databases because it's the "approved company standard" so we're not dealing with large scale installation stuff like clusters. That being said everything that we use it for works great including Intermedia which in the past has always been problematic, no matter what platform Oracle is on.
The federal government is considering outlawing this abusive practise.
Nonsense. Maybe they can dictate that on government web sites but your independent web developer or company can do this all they want. Maybe if we made an effort to fix or replace SMTP rather than keep finding more clever ways to treat the symptoms we'd all be better off. I think that spam is a big enough problem now that if something better than SMTP came along most administrators wouldn't hesitate to start making the switch.
Everything. The OP's point is that with just a little bit of critical thinking you can see that there isn't any factual information to link the BBC story to something some unnamed individual said on a mailing list. Just because Cory Doctorow read it it somewhere doesn't make it true. With the information provided it just doesn't add up.
First a post about cops busting down a door for a user using Lynx. His only evidence is something he saw posted on "a mailing list." No link to this list so that we can read it for ourselves. We have no idea who the person is that gave the details quoted in Doctorow's blog. Doctorow is just repeating something he saw somewhere without giving any attribution to the original post. That doesn't make it believable no matter who Doctorow is. Meanwhile there's a link to a story that doesn't mention anything about browsers or operating systems.
Then an update stating that he has more information to corroborate the story but he refuses to share it. This is a non-story based on hearsay from an unnamed third party. Sorry, but I expect more information before I believe something like this. For all I know a troll could be playing a big joke on Doctorow.
I'm not saying "The fact that it's Cory Doctorow means it really happened", I'm saying "Cory has enough of a reputation that this is really news".
Wait a minute. You don't know if it really happened, but it's really news? I expect for my news to have really happened.
I don't know about you but I gave it 76 chances. After that I decided I wasn't going to bother with the fourth season. Time travel is the last refuge of the uncreative. I can stand a few episodes of it but it's really been abused in this series.
at least the new series has Hoshi
What's that supposed to mean? Did they finally start doing some character development in the fourth season? That's my biggest problem with Enterprise; They haven't done anything to help me get to know the characters and care about what happens to them. Brannon and Braga have really ruined things.
Is Orkut even a real site? Out of my rather large circle of geek friends, we have yet to meet a single person who actually has a login. We've all assumed that it was just some kind of publicity stunt.
Sorry about that. I meant 30% of each paycheck. I realize that number could vary based on employeer, earnings, etc. The $14k/year limit is only for pre-tax contributions. Some employeers, such as mine, allow for after-tax contributions as well.
After discovering that Mozilla had added the ability to have style be limited to certain URLs I wanted more practice with CSS and fixing issues with web sites that bother me or make it difficult for me to read them. The first thing I fixed was the message display in the new Google Groups. I was annoyed that they had changed the display of message bodies from a monospaced font to a proportional font. I'm a shell script junkie so this change had made scripts and code snippets in Usenet postings hard to read. Google Groups has an algorithm to check each line to see if it should be monospaced or not but it usually makes things worse. So I coooked up this:
/* Display messages on google groups in monospaced font */ @-moz-document url-prefix(http://groups-beta.google.com/) {
DIV[class=mbody] {
font-family: monospace ! important;
font-size: medium;
}
DIV[class=mbody] pre {
margin: 0 ! important;
font-size: medium;
} /* 100% width for search results */ .r {
width: 100% !important
} }
After that was done I realized that the ads on the Google Groups search results overlapped the search results themselves. It problem doesn't help that I have an poor vision, even with glasses, and have to use a 20pt font just to be able to read things. The ads overlapping my search results were hindering me reading the information that I needed. So I removed those.
Wanting to work on something more challenging I decided to try and remove the ads from all of the Google sites that I use. Google doesn't use stylesheets everywhere so I had to learn more about CSS3 selectors and try to isolate the elements that contained the ads.
Anyway, I don't feel bad about this at all. The ads don't contribute to my online experience; In fact, they take away from it as they are just more information that I must scan with my eyes and process. Better to remove them altogether. Removing them also has the benefit that I have more of my screen real-estate back like with the Google Groups search results. At my font size, some web pages can get pretty cramped.
Last, and this might sound silly, but after living on the Eastern US for many years and then moving to the San Francisco bay area, I was surprised to notice that there are no billboards on the sides of the roads, save for some large cities like San Francisco itself. This made me have a new appreciation for an ad-free environment. It's so nice to be able to see and enjoy the beautiful scenery around here without having that view interrupted by someone trying to sell me something. Since then I've noticed that I'm advertised to constantly. I receive junk mail in my regular mailbox, spam in my email boxes, telemarketing calls, ads on the radio, ads on the TV, ads that I can't skip before movies on DVDs that I bought, ads in the theatre before I watch a movie, ads in magazines, ads in newspapers, etc. It's relentless and overwhelming.
At least I can do something about it. I use spamassassin and milter-sender on my mail server. I put my address on the DMA no-mail list. I put my address on the list to not allow credit checks by credit card companies. I put my phone number on the do-not-call list. And if I can weed out the ads on web sites then I'll do that too. I use the same policy with web ads as I do spam. My browser, my rules. Just because it's on your page doesn't mean you can dictate how or what part of it is shown to me.
Meanwhile, I'm having a blast with style sheets and the URL limiting in Mozilla. It's really enriched my browsing experience.
The @-moz-document url-prefix() statements will only work on Mozilla 1.8a3 and above. I'm pretty sure they'll make it into Firefox 1.1. As for Safari, you'd have to try it out and maybe remove the @-moz-document url-prefix() parts. The stylesheet should work on anything that is supporting CSS3 selectors.
Slashdot Mirror
In Japan, the first party to file for the patent is the person who is granted the patent, not the first person to invent. It's this way is most countries but not the US.
I don't think that it's common sense. Google isn't going to rely on one source of income. They currently have other ways of making money besides ad revenue including their search appliances and Google Answers. Ads make up a majority of that income but they've been at that longer. They'll deversify their income. There's no reason to believe that they could have done this from the start with another source of revenue other than ads. So I still stand by my assertion that there could have been, and probably would have been, a Google if they had not pursued revenue from ads.
So you must be Google management to know that for a fact then?
Nonsense. If they weren't there then Google would have found another way to generate income.
It's incidents like this that is leading us towards having to be licenced to write software much like architects and engineers are licensed to practice their trade. We may be another 10-20 years away from that but unless software developers get their act together it's going to come sooner than we all think.
Why the obsession with being original? If someone has a good idea what's wrong with using it? Not everyone has to 'innovate'.
After experiencing it at work, at home, and hearing about it from friends and family, users become used to it and even expect it. "Computers crash and get infected. That's just a fact of life," they say. To most users it's normal because they don't know any better and haven't discovered or tried any alternatives.
You know, maybe Firefox isn't the problem. Just a thought.
In any case, I work for a pharmaceutical company of about 60,000 people. We have a global contract for Oracle that includes support so deploying another Oracle box is of little cost to us overall. The place where we are using Oracle on Debian are places where we'd be unlikely to use Oracle's support. In fact, these are places where PostgreSQL, or even MySQL, would probably be sufficient. However, Oracle is the company mandated database standard and that's what we have to use. There isn't any such standard for Unix systems so we use Debian where it makes sense. It also helps that our DBA is top-notch having administrated Oracle on both Unix and Windows for many years.
Having said that, most of the Oracle instances throughout the company do run on Oracle approved OS's such as AIX or Windows. Those usually have a much more complex setup such as failover or clustering. They also house more mission critical databases.
In any case, the point of my original post was to refute the parent poster's comment that Oracle doesn't run on Debian. It does, and it runs well.
Define "supported." Debian supports Oracle so I'm using it.
Any hackers want to take on bug 249343 to port the Mozilla roaming profile code to Firefox?
There's a lot of resources online for installing Oracle on Debian and the notes on Oracle for Redhat are useful for Debian admins too.
First a post about cops busting down a door for a user using Lynx. His only evidence is something he saw posted on "a mailing list." No link to this list so that we can read it for ourselves. We have no idea who the person is that gave the details quoted in Doctorow's blog. Doctorow is just repeating something he saw somewhere without giving any attribution to the original post. That doesn't make it believable no matter who Doctorow is. Meanwhile there's a link to a story that doesn't mention anything about browsers or operating systems.
Then an update stating that he has more information to corroborate the story but he refuses to share it. This is a non-story based on hearsay from an unnamed third party. Sorry, but I expect more information before I believe something like this. For all I know a troll could be playing a big joke on Doctorow.
Wait a minute. You don't know if it really happened, but it's really news? I expect for my news to have really happened.What is the "Newhart" ending?
Is Orkut even a real site? Out of my rather large circle of geek friends, we have yet to meet a single person who actually has a login. We've all assumed that it was just some kind of publicity stunt.
Sorry about that. I meant 30% of each paycheck. I realize that number could vary based on employeer, earnings, etc. The $14k/year limit is only for pre-tax contributions. Some employeers, such as mine, allow for after-tax contributions as well.
Looks like it only works on Firefox. I use Mozilla.
After discovering that Mozilla had added the ability to have style be limited to certain URLs I wanted more practice with CSS and fixing issues with web sites that bother me or make it difficult for me to read them. The first thing I fixed was the message display in the new Google Groups. I was annoyed that they had changed the display of message bodies from a monospaced font to a proportional font. I'm a shell script junkie so this change had made scripts and code snippets in Usenet postings hard to read. Google Groups has an algorithm to check each line to see if it should be monospaced or not but it usually makes things worse. So I coooked up this:After that was done I realized that the ads on the Google Groups search results overlapped the search results themselves. It problem doesn't help that I have an poor vision, even with glasses, and have to use a 20pt font just to be able to read things. The ads overlapping my search results were hindering me reading the information that I needed. So I removed those.
Wanting to work on something more challenging I decided to try and remove the ads from all of the Google sites that I use. Google doesn't use stylesheets everywhere so I had to learn more about CSS3 selectors and try to isolate the elements that contained the ads.
Anyway, I don't feel bad about this at all. The ads don't contribute to my online experience; In fact, they take away from it as they are just more information that I must scan with my eyes and process. Better to remove them altogether. Removing them also has the benefit that I have more of my screen real-estate back like with the Google Groups search results. At my font size, some web pages can get pretty cramped.
Last, and this might sound silly, but after living on the Eastern US for many years and then moving to the San Francisco bay area, I was surprised to notice that there are no billboards on the sides of the roads, save for some large cities like San Francisco itself. This made me have a new appreciation for an ad-free environment. It's so nice to be able to see and enjoy the beautiful scenery around here without having that view interrupted by someone trying to sell me something. Since then I've noticed that I'm advertised to constantly. I receive junk mail in my regular mailbox, spam in my email boxes, telemarketing calls, ads on the radio, ads on the TV, ads that I can't skip before movies on DVDs that I bought, ads in the theatre before I watch a movie, ads in magazines, ads in newspapers, etc. It's relentless and overwhelming.
At least I can do something about it. I use spamassassin and milter-sender on my mail server. I put my address on the DMA no-mail list. I put my address on the list to not allow credit checks by credit card companies. I put my phone number on the do-not-call list. And if I can weed out the ads on web sites then I'll do that too. I use the same policy with web ads as I do spam. My browser, my rules. Just because it's on your page doesn't mean you can dictate how or what part of it is shown to me.
Meanwhile, I'm having a blast with style sheets and the URL limiting in Mozilla. It's really enriched my browsing experience.
The @-moz-document url-prefix() statements will only work on Mozilla 1.8a3 and above. I'm pretty sure they'll make it into Firefox 1.1. As for Safari, you'd have to try it out and maybe remove the @-moz-document url-prefix() parts. The stylesheet should work on anything that is supporting CSS3 selectors.