"banging together a quick powerpoint presentation" is a subset of "corporate presentations."
Banging together a quick presentation is pretty easy to port from Powerpoint to Impress or vice versa. However, complex presentations may not be. There's a *lot* of functionality in, say, Powerpoint that isn't going to be easy for most people to transfer directly into Impress with zero training.
The same goes for Writer, Calc, Base, etc. Expecting to simply drop users who do a lot of in-depth work with these applications directly into OO without training is a recipe for disaster, and no sane IT department would ever ever do it.
So, in other words, you've never worked inside a modern corporate office.
Users use of the suite of applications that come in Microsoft Office to do complex things, from presentations, to databases, to collaboration, to complex spreadsheets, etc etc. There's a *lot* of functionality present in OO or MS Office and it's not all trivial to use.
They work with a highly limited source of information.
They need to legislate on *everything* and lobbyists from every industry constantly throw data at them - of course, this data is highly skewed towards corporate interests.
It would take a lot of time and effort to track down independent information on virtually every subject in existence... and they already have people actively supplying them with tons of information already, so there is no will to track down independent info that may or may not make any sense to him or her.
When you're surrounded by "experts" pouring information on you concerning a subject you know nothing about, it would take a monumental act to set all that aside and go do your own research. Now imagine 535 Congressmen and Congresswomen all doing that for every single topic they have to make decisions on.
"The GPLv2 license has an option to specify that code is licensed by "GPL version 2 or later". If this is the case then the argument goes that many of those who wrote code under GPLv2 could simply say "well now my code is licensed under GPLv3"."
Sure, they can say that, but that only applies to those who accept the code from that point on or those who redistribute it with GPLv3.
You can't retroactively change a license agreement. I can license *you* my code under the BSD license and then license *Microsoft* the same code under the GPL. That doesn't make *you* bound to the GPL or anything.
The license agreement accepted by the party who received the code at the time they received it is the only thing that matters. "Or later" means that the party who received the code can then modify it and relicense it under a later version, not that the license the receiving party accepted can be modified.
"First, we believe that 2 machines are definitely not enough, because the chance of correct guess, using a completely random (read: unreliable) detection method is 50%. Thus we think that the reasonable number is 5 machines."
She then goes on to detail how at least one but no more than four of the machines are infected and that the detection method must be automatic and return only "infected" or "not infected" as output.
There are some other details she proposes, some of which are head-scratchers such as "The detector can not consume significant amount of CPU time (say > 90%) for more then, say 1 sec."
The OP's is a one in 100,000,000,000 - and that's assuming a truly massive failure rate of 10% globally. If you assume a 5% failure rate, the chance plummets to one in 204,800,000,000,000. That's one in 204 trillion.
There's clearly some common factor here, whether it's the UPS delivery man or keeping the XBox and its power supply under an overturned cardboard box while running.
Perhaps even purposefully. I can definitely see the motivation to go through so many XBox units as to get your name on the front page of Digg, Slashdot, and 1up.
Would Miguel's team not have been able to code this under a closed license? Was there significant public involvement that was critical to the project?
Also, what was accomplished? A 100% direct rip-off of a product already created and demonstrated by a closed-source development house? Impressive. Wow.
Slashdot Mirror
SD is roughly 480i. That's 640x480, 60 interlaced frames per second.
640 * 480 * 60 * 0.5 = 9,216,000 pixels/second
720p is 1280x720, 60 full frames per second
1280 * 720 * 60 = 55,296,000 pixels/second
1080i is 1920x1080, 60 interlaced frames per second.
1920 * 1080 * 60 * 0.5 = 62,208,000 pixels/second
720p delivers 6 times as many pixels per second and 1080i delivers almost 7 times as many pixels per second as SD.
720p delivers 3 times as many pixels per [full] frame as SD.
"banging together a quick powerpoint presentation" is a subset of "corporate presentations."
Banging together a quick presentation is pretty easy to port from Powerpoint to Impress or vice versa. However, complex presentations may not be. There's a *lot* of functionality in, say, Powerpoint that isn't going to be easy for most people to transfer directly into Impress with zero training.
The same goes for Writer, Calc, Base, etc. Expecting to simply drop users who do a lot of in-depth work with these applications directly into OO without training is a recipe for disaster, and no sane IT department would ever ever do it.
"it's just a word processor"
So, in other words, you've never worked inside a modern corporate office.
Users use of the suite of applications that come in Microsoft Office to do complex things, from presentations, to databases, to collaboration, to complex spreadsheets, etc etc. There's a *lot* of functionality present in OO or MS Office and it's not all trivial to use.
Wow, that was last updated 10 months ago and forecasts development all the way through... uh...
"* date for creating a new code line SRC690
is not available yet (2007 ?)
* OOo 3.0 in 2007 ?"
That's what a manager loves to see.
The reality is that they have a point.
His treasonous bullshit.
The joke is that he would not want fear eliminated in the general public, because then he wouldn't be able to get away with his bullshit.
Yes, I read the whole article. This is exactly what the Zune does.
I guess the news is that it's patented...?
Didn't Microsoft implement this almost a year ago with the Zune?
What's the news here?
Will it blend?
:)
That is the question
Commercial burning programs do not have DeCSS, because breaking CSS (necessary to copy a commercial DVD) is illegal to use in many countries.
It's not software socialism, it's software fascism.
OSS is software communism (that's not an insult).
COD2 has a massive online following and remains the only FPS I've played consistently.
The COD games are really, really excellent. They may not be your thing, but a lot of people really love them.
There was a quote in the article about making COD4 deeper and more sophisticated, which really excites me.
They work with a highly limited source of information.
They need to legislate on *everything* and lobbyists from every industry constantly throw data at them - of course, this data is highly skewed towards corporate interests.
It would take a lot of time and effort to track down independent information on virtually every subject in existence... and they already have people actively supplying them with tons of information already, so there is no will to track down independent info that may or may not make any sense to him or her.
When you're surrounded by "experts" pouring information on you concerning a subject you know nothing about, it would take a monumental act to set all that aside and go do your own research. Now imagine 535 Congressmen and Congresswomen all doing that for every single topic they have to make decisions on.
"The GPLv2 license has an option to specify that code is licensed by "GPL version 2 or later". If this is the case then the argument goes that many of those who wrote code under GPLv2 could simply say "well now my code is licensed under GPLv3"."
Sure, they can say that, but that only applies to those who accept the code from that point on or those who redistribute it with GPLv3.
You can't retroactively change a license agreement. I can license *you* my code under the BSD license and then license *Microsoft* the same code under the GPL. That doesn't make *you* bound to the GPL or anything.
The license agreement accepted by the party who received the code at the time they received it is the only thing that matters. "Or later" means that the party who received the code can then modify it and relicense it under a later version, not that the license the receiving party accepted can be modified.
It's a little OT, but truth is an absolute defense to slander. Slander is, by definition, untrue.
I love how my comment is modded redundant by someone reading the comments in a threaded view.
Here's the full story:m e_change
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prince_(musician)#Na
What a loon.
He *is* known as Prince. For a time, he wasn't, because his label owned the name. However, he is now, and has been for some time, known as prince.
From the comments section, Nate Lawson has posted his response to Joanna:
e rvisor-rootkit-challenge/
http://rdist.root.org/2007/06/28/undetectable-hyp
Rutkowska already thought of that (as well as a couple of other things):
:)
http://theinvisiblethings.blogspot.com/
"First, we believe that 2 machines are definitely not enough, because the chance of correct guess, using a completely random (read: unreliable) detection method is 50%. Thus we think that the reasonable number is 5 machines."
She then goes on to detail how at least one but no more than four of the machines are infected and that the detection method must be automatic and return only "infected" or "not infected" as output.
There are some other details she proposes, some of which are head-scratchers such as "The detector can not consume significant amount of CPU time (say > 90%) for more then, say 1 sec."
Whole thing sounds pretty interesting though
That's a one in 3,200,000 chance.
The OP's is a one in 100,000,000,000 - and that's assuming a truly massive failure rate of 10% globally. If you assume a 5% failure rate, the chance plummets to one in 204,800,000,000,000. That's one in 204 trillion.
There's clearly some common factor here, whether it's the UPS delivery man or keeping the XBox and its power supply under an overturned cardboard box while running.
Perhaps even purposefully. I can definitely see the motivation to go through so many XBox units as to get your name on the front page of Digg, Slashdot, and 1up.
The replicants in Blade Runner are 100% organic.
What Open Source is capable of?
Would Miguel's team not have been able to code this under a closed license? Was there significant public involvement that was critical to the project?
Also, what was accomplished? A 100% direct rip-off of a product already created and demonstrated by a closed-source development house? Impressive. Wow.
LOL
I was going to paste essentially the same thing, but realized it would be redundant.
"Linux developers copy Microsoft product in record time! The future is Linux!" ??
Joke's on you.
;)
Hot dogs are already cooked when you buy them