It could be the identifier is a hash - there is some chance of collision, so cannot be guaranteed to be unique.
Yeah, it's pretty clear that "substantially unique identifier" is some kind of legal-speak for "hash code". I see what they're getting at, but the phrase "substantially unique" still makes no sense - either an ID is unique or it isn't.
5,978,791 - Data processing system using substantially unique identifiers to identify data items, whereby identical data items have the same identifiers
"Substantially unique" - I love that.
I wasn't aware there were varying degrees of "unique". Maybe there's a scale:
Not unique
Slightly unique
Moderately unique
Substantially unique
Very unique
Completely Unique
The best part is that this potentially allows for many moderately unique patents, each patenting varying degrees of uniqueness.
Definitely a different sense of the place than the one given by the reddish-brown posters I remember from elementary school.
That's because the picture has been altered to remove the red haze, in order to produce an image that more closely resembles a landscape on Earth.
From the article:
The colors in this image are not what a human standing on Mars would see — the presence of dust in the atmosphere would make the scene appear much redder. Instead, the pictures have been white-balanced to show how it would appear under typical Earth lighting conditions. This will help the Earth-centered geologists who are trained to recognize features based on how they look using more familiar light.
I challenge you find out what's wrong about the content of the bible and find an convincing argument why people who believe in Christ are doing it in vein. If you want to show that the bible is made up, or its text is corrupt, I'm going to put you through scientific method process and axiomatic logic reasoning to establish your case.
Have you read The God Delusion?. It does a pretty good job of explaining why religion, in general, doesn't make any sense, and it does so via a clear logical thought process.
When I read Dawkins' book, I suddenly understood this quote from 1984:
The best books... are those that tell you what you know already
What might be practical, however, is to think about how to site critical pieces of infrastructure (such as... say... nuclear power plants...
Honest question - does anyone know why the Fukushima plant was built on the east coast of Japan, facing the bomb-waiting-to-go-off that is the massive subduction zone a few miles off shore?
Why wasn't it built on the west coast, so it was sheltered by the island itself? I know hindsight is a wonderful thing, but looking at the map this seems like a schoolboy error to me.
Read RMS' Java Trap essay. He made some extreme claims about licensing and using java libraries/packages.
I consider using java.* packages to be no different than linking to libc. However, (according to RMS), due to the nature of the JAVA VM engine, it's as if you copy/pasted all the libc code into your application. Result: you cannot write GPL java software that uses the Sun classpath (since it is not GPL licensed).
If the Sun classpath is placed under a GPL license, then all software which uses it must be placed under the GPL as well.
That's simply not true. You're describing what happens when you use #include in C/C++. In Java the rough equivalent is the import keyword, which doesn't work in the same way at all.
import just defines a fully qualified package name so you can refer to classes in that package using their simple names. That's all it does.
You're missing the point. The ID for Sony's service does not allow you to play online games.
To enable online play, a different service, in addition to Sony's service, is needed (e.g. Gamespy, XFire etc.). Access to such a service will naturally involve another ID. Not your Sony ID.
And unless all games companies agree on using a single solution to this problem (I'd estimate the chances of that happening as zero), you're going to end up with several different IDs - one for each service.
> The WINE developers are producing a new, Linux based implentation for the Windows API, without studying Windows source code -- there is no reverse-engineering involved. They are simply implementing the Windows API.
I.e., they are reverse engineering the DLLs.
I completely disagree with this. Simply implementing an API does not constitute, or necessarily involve, reverse engineering.
Consider JVMs. All JVMs need to implement the same API - compatibility is tested via the Java Compatibility Kit. If your implementation passes the JCK tests, it can be certified as Java compatible.
At no stage do you need to reverse engineer Sun's reference JVM to produce a new implementation. You just need to produce an implementation which behaves correctly with reference to the published API, and test it using the JCK.
If the Windows API is published, and I believe it is, there is no requirement for reverse engineering in order to construct a compatible implementation. You just jump several stages in the development cycle - you skip the design stages and move straight to code construction and unit testing, because you already have an API which has been designed and defined by Microsoft.
Of course, you do not have access to the design documents, so implementation will be non-trivial. Reverse engineering is one way to make progress, but it is not essential - you could create the implementation solely via testing your implementation to check whether it behaves the way the API states it should. That is not reverse engineering. That is testing.
Reverse engineering in terms of software involves studying source code to see how it works, typically before producing your own implementation based on what you have learned.
If the relevant source code was available, there would be nothing dark-hattish about reverse engineering Windows DLLs, but the source code is not availible. So, to reverse engineer any of the Windows code you would first need to decompile the binaries, which is an activity I'm sure most people would consider 'dark-hattish'.
The WINE developers are producing a new, Linux based implentation for the Windows API, without studying Windows source code -- there is no reverse-engineering involved. They are simply implementing the Windows API.
Slashdot Mirror
Yes, CREW biologists jerked off the rhino while he gorged himself. Pretty much any man's dream, right?
Yeah, those lucky lucky biologists.
It could be the identifier is a hash - there is some chance of collision, so cannot be guaranteed to be unique.
Yeah, it's pretty clear that "substantially unique identifier" is some kind of legal-speak for "hash code". I see what they're getting at, but the phrase "substantially unique" still makes no sense - either an ID is unique or it isn't.
5,978,791 - Data processing system using substantially unique identifiers to identify data items, whereby identical data items have the same identifiers
"Substantially unique" - I love that.
I wasn't aware there were varying degrees of "unique". Maybe there's a scale:
The best part is that this potentially allows for many moderately unique patents, each patenting varying degrees of uniqueness.
From the summary:
Definitely a different sense of the place than the one given by the reddish-brown posters I remember from elementary school.
That's because the picture has been altered to remove the red haze, in order to produce an image that more closely resembles a landscape on Earth.
From the article:
The colors in this image are not what a human standing on Mars would see — the presence of dust in the atmosphere would make the scene appear much redder. Instead, the pictures have been white-balanced to show how it would appear under typical Earth lighting conditions. This will help the Earth-centered geologists who are trained to recognize features based on how they look using more familiar light.
They're like your dad trying to dance at a nightclub.
You mean like this?
No court system in the world has any jurisdiction over "private contractors", or they won't be "private contractors"
Where do these people live? In space?
I challenge you find out what's wrong about the content of the bible and find an convincing argument why people who believe in Christ are doing it in vein. If you want to show that the bible is made up, or its text is corrupt, I'm going to put you through scientific method process and axiomatic logic reasoning to establish your case.
Have you read The God Delusion?. It does a pretty good job of explaining why religion, in general, doesn't make any sense, and it does so via a clear logical thought process. When I read Dawkins' book, I suddenly understood this quote from 1984:
The best books... are those that tell you what you know already
I think the Olympics will go ahead very well - they simply have to.
It's the ever increasing amount of public money required to make that happen that worries me.
want to see how Capitalism can destroy something? Look at the Olympics.
Couldn't agree more. If any more evidence was required, just consider the "official Olympic restaurant"...
You guessed it: McDonald's.
I can't actually think of a less suitable sponsor for the Olympics.
Been there, done that they went feral : http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Feral_goats_in_Australia. Though some farmers to make a fair living off mustering the ferals and then selling them for pelts and meat.
If the Aussies' reaction to the feral goats is anything to go by, the sight of children racing on elephant chariots would be a suitable consolation.
O2 must be glad they made their massive screw up before this came into effect...
What might be practical, however, is to think about how to site critical pieces of infrastructure (such as... say... nuclear power plants...
Honest question - does anyone know why the Fukushima plant was built on the east coast of Japan, facing the bomb-waiting-to-go-off that is the massive subduction zone a few miles off shore?
Why wasn't it built on the west coast, so it was sheltered by the island itself? I know hindsight is a wonderful thing, but looking at the map this seems like a schoolboy error to me.
Excellent answer.
I wonder if the level of searches for Michelle Obama has increased since this story was released?
Yes, it has
I just finished reading an excellent book on this subject by Dan Gardner. Highly recommended.
It's a Simpsons quote.
"Xbox 360, PS3, Wii" is probably more accurate
Read RMS' Java Trap essay. He made some extreme claims about licensing and using java libraries/packages.
I consider using java.* packages to be no different than linking to libc. However, (according to RMS), due to the nature of the JAVA VM engine, it's as if you copy/pasted all the libc code into your application. Result: you cannot write GPL java software that uses the Sun classpath (since it is not GPL licensed).
If the Sun classpath is placed under a GPL license, then all software which uses it must be placed under the GPL as well.
That's simply not true. You're describing what happens when you use #include in C/C++. In Java the rough equivalent is the import keyword, which doesn't work in the same way at all.
import just defines a fully qualified package name so you can refer to classes in that package using their simple names. That's all it does.
"Bring out the gimp"
Looks like I might be talking shit. From the article, page 2 paragraph 2:
...all of the online services, from sign-up right through to voice and video chat, are free, as is normal multiplayer gaming
RTFA, it's single sign-on. It's in the page one.
You're missing the point. The ID for Sony's service does not allow you to play online games.
To enable online play, a different service, in addition to Sony's service, is needed (e.g. Gamespy, XFire etc.). Access to such a service will naturally involve another ID. Not your Sony ID.
And unless all games companies agree on using a single solution to this problem (I'd estimate the chances of that happening as zero), you're going to end up with several different IDs - one for each service.
This is a complete mess compared to Xbox Live.
It's not government run:
...the BBC is, per its charter, to be free from both political and commercial influence and answers only to its viewers and listeners.
Source
See here for yourself
If this is a real photo, I'm Father Christmas.
That is simply wrong.
Whatever.
> The WINE developers are producing a new, Linux based implentation for the Windows API, without studying Windows source code -- there is no reverse-engineering involved. They are simply implementing the Windows API.
I.e., they are reverse engineering the DLLs.
I completely disagree with this. Simply implementing an API does not constitute, or necessarily involve, reverse engineering.
Consider JVMs. All JVMs need to implement the same API - compatibility is tested via the Java Compatibility Kit. If your implementation passes the JCK tests, it can be certified as Java compatible.
At no stage do you need to reverse engineer Sun's reference JVM to produce a new implementation. You just need to produce an implementation which behaves correctly with reference to the published API, and test it using the JCK.
If the Windows API is published, and I believe it is, there is no requirement for reverse engineering in order to construct a compatible implementation. You just jump several stages in the development cycle - you skip the design stages and move straight to code construction and unit testing, because you already have an API which has been designed and defined by Microsoft.
Of course, you do not have access to the design documents, so implementation will be non-trivial. Reverse engineering is one way to make progress, but it is not essential - you could create the implementation solely via testing your implementation to check whether it behaves the way the API states it should. That is not reverse engineering. That is testing.
Reverse engineering in terms of software involves studying source code to see how it works, typically before producing your own implementation based on what you have learned.
If the relevant source code was available, there would be nothing dark-hattish about reverse engineering Windows DLLs, but the source code is not availible. So, to reverse engineer any of the Windows code you would first need to decompile the binaries, which is an activity I'm sure most people would consider 'dark-hattish'.
The WINE developers are producing a new, Linux based implentation for the Windows API, without studying Windows source code -- there is no reverse-engineering involved. They are simply implementing the Windows API.