Seems to me that ASN.1 also would represent some fairly significant prior art.
Quotes from that web site:
Abstract Syntax Notation One (ASN.1) is a formal language for abstractly describing messages to be exchanged among an extensive range of applications....
ASN.1 was first standardized in 1984 by the CCITT (International Telegraph and Telephone Consultative Committee, now called ITU-T, International Telecommunication Union - Telecommunication Standardization Sector) under the name "X.409 Recommendation".
How new? The version number where this new feature appears would be nice, or even any version that includes it. I'm using 2.18, and don't see it. Am I just missing something, or was it added later? Thanks!
Let's assume that the worst happened, which I suspect is that a Microsoft FAT patent was upheld and that Microsoft either required licensing or refused to license for Linux.
How about this: We remove from Linux the ability to create FAT filesystems. Seems to me this is similar to what happened with GIF images a few years ago. If someone on a Linux box wants to access a FAT filesystem, and they don't have the software to create the FAT filesystem themselves, then someone else had to create it for them. That someone else is either going to be:
another (or the same) user using a Windows operating system (which, one could presume, includes the necessary licensing to create its filesystems)
the manufacturer of a device (e.g., USB fob or digital camera) who would probably still have to take out a license and pay Microsoft for the rights to create the FAT filesystem on their products.
So, it seems to me that this boils down to Linux users who don't deal with FAT not having to worry about it and Linux users who do deal with FAT having paid indirectly for the license through the software or device that creates such filesystems in the first place.
Is this really a big deal (other than philosophically)?
Although the primary idea behind 2001: ASO started out as a short story ("The Sentinel", I believe), Clarke did go back and create a full length 2001 book, mostly matching up with the movie.
In the book, Discovery was going to Saturn. There was the implication that Saturns rings, being there for a comparatively short time, were like a giant interplanetary billboard, intended only for a race of beings that, if the experiment succeeded, would be prepared to understand and act on it before the rings were gone. The "Making of 2001" book talks a bit about the decision to cut the flight short at Jupiter.
Naturally, with the change in destination to Jupiter, the subsequent books included plot elements revolving around it, rather than Saturn.
For my personal use, I have a small handful of "strong" passphrases, one for each of a small handful of gpg/PGP keys. Each is over a dozen characters long. Each includes mixed case and non-alphanumerics. I'm guessing that in the absence of shoulder-surfing or keyboard sniffers, they are each secure for a lot longer than I'm likely to be around. They haven't changed in years. I remember them all.
On the other hand, my place of employment requires that I come up with a "strong" password every 30 days. About the time that I'm beginning to type my password from memory, I start getting warnings that I'd better start thinking of a new one. I finally decided that it just wasn't worth the effort to try to remember a new nonsense password every month, and now have my password recorded (encrypted with a strong password that has never changed) on my Palm Tungsten T5.
I'm not quite sure what language the parent article was in. It appeared to be similar enough to English that I thought I would take a stab at translation. I do not necessarily agree or disagree. Just performing a public service.:-)
Oh, God! You couldn't be more wrong if you tried.
OK. You were right, in that the amendment had to do with militias, but after that one point you fairly jump off the path and run screaming off the cliff.
To properly read the amendment, it's necessary to look back at how our nation got to the the point of being a nation.
In the first 2 years of the revolution, our forces were made up of militias that supplied their own weapons with which to fight against the British, as the founding fathers had no weapons or weapon stockpiles with which to supply them. Nor would they have for 2 years, which is how long it took to put together the continental army for Washington to command to continue the fight.
So, the founding fathers acknowledged this in the right to bear arms, first by saying that militias are necessary to the defense of states. Then, by saying that since people are necessary to militias, their right to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed because, as stated, the people were where the militias' weapons came from. In some militias today, it's still where the weapons come from -- their members.
As for how many times a day a weapon or (as you state) a gun gets used to commit crimes against people, I would submit that a gun isn't necessary to commit these crimes. It is just that gun crime tends to be more reported to the general public than crimes committed by other means. For example, let's take the hockey dad incident. No gun or knife or other artifical weapon was used, but one father is just as dead, having been beaten to death by the other father. As another poster said, should we ban muscles as well?
Personally I don't have a gun, nor do I use drugs (legal or otherwise). But that doesn't mean that I'm against the right to bear arms. No one, not even you, knows what the future will bring. So, it's at least conceivable that, one day, the people of this land may again owe their safety and protection to people who do own guns. I didn't say they would -- just that it's conceivable.
Just because we have an Army and National Guard now doesn't mean we should get rid of that extra line of defense. Yes, without it, there wouldn't be any crimes commited with legal handguns. But illegal handgun crimes would continue. Only the crooks would be armed, as they could easily get arms on the black market, have them smuggled in across borders, or even under borders (as in the instance where drugs were being smuggled into the U.S. via a tunnel running between two houses on either side of the Mexican / U.S. border).
As for the battle flag crack, PLEASE! I won't even diginfy that statement.
I went through the list, and counted using the following rules. I don't have to currently own a given item; it counts if I have ever owned the item. If a specific model was listed, I have to have owned that specific model; my ThinkPad 770ED does not count but my phone does.
If you are not "allowing pserver access at all", why do you need to worry about the userid of the CVS server? It seems to me that there's no reason to even be running the server if you aren't allowing pserver access. I've never run it on my CVS servers.
I would recommend structuring your build tree and makefiles in such a way that build products for different platforms are placed into (or built into) different directories. Thus, each platform's build products are kept distinct, and no make cleans are required.
Also, there have been a couple of CDs of Open Source software ported to MS-Windows. I used BitTorrent to download them, and left the connection up for a few more days to share with others.
I think that you meant "formerly known as Lindows".
BTW, many of the "live CD" Linux distros will get their network configuration from a DHCP server. Try Knoppix (now in version 3.7) I fired it up on a system at work today, selecting the 2.6.9 kernel and it came up just fine. With previous releases of Knoppix, booting a 2.4.x kernel, I've also had no problems with the network.
I guess there must be a market for this somewhere. It just seems to me that if you can manage to run a wire to carry the Ethernet networking signals, it should not be all that much more difficult to run some power at the same time.
Now, on the other hand, if this were providing power over an 802.11b/g connection, I'd be asking where to sign up!
A couple weeks ago, I (computer geek) helped a friend (Microsoft victim) install SuSE 9.1 onto an older PC that he wasn't doing anything with. I was amazed at the amount of stuff that had to be done, figured out, or explained that I will typically just do without thinking. Having my friend there trying to figure this stuff out really brought home the fact that that particular distro was not particularly "novice-friendly". One thing that particularly surprised me was the amount of trouble we had getting X up and running. The config that it came up with on its own didn't work. No matter what we tried with the config file didn't work. We eventually deleted the Modeline entries and let the defaults be used, and that worked just fine.
Now, I'm not saying that everything we did was hard or time consuming, but we did stay up until 4am getting things up to basic functioning.
I'll be installing SuSE 9.2 on a home machine or two over the next couple of weeks. I'll try to make note of everything that needs to be done that does not seem "novice-friendly".
It's good to hear about a distro that can be recommended to Linux neophytes.
When I first ran into one of these, I successfully used it to prepare several pieces of mail for mailing. Then, I got to one for which I needed a zip code. Ah, cool! The machine includes zip code lookup capability. Figuring that I knew how to use a computer, I went ahead and typed in the full city name at the city prompt. Unfortunately, it wanted only the first four letters of the city name. Boom! The system went into self-diagnostics mode, with some screen widgets that looked pretty obviously like MS-Windows. After many minutes, the system came back up and was available for service. I didn't get a receipt for the earlier mail pieces, although I am confident that they managed to charge me for them. A subsequent "test" of a similar "enter the full city name" zip lookup at another P.O. simply returned the proper zip code.
BTW, I hung around waiting for the machine because the medium-tech electronic postal scale on the other side of the lobby gave me three very different weights for the same envelope. sigh.
I guess I don't understand slashdot as well as I thought. I attempted to report on this at 8:01 am CST, but the article (which included a link to a news story for more details) was rejected. So, if the story wasn't interesting at 8am, why was it interesting 15 hours later? Thanks.
Isn't saying, "OCaml also has full support for object-oriented programming that fits in completely with OCaml's strong type system." equivalent to saying, "Ford Thunderbird also has full support for all fuels that meet its fuel requirements."?
I have full version 9.1. Saving $30+ sounds pretty good. What do I give up by buying the Upgrade version? In other words, what are the differences between full and upgrade versions? Thanks!
Well, I won't give an opinion as to whether it's biased. (We all have biases, after all.) However, if you drill down and read the details on each candidate, they claim that they are basing their information on a variety of ratings by a variety of groups. Some of these include: Antional Taxpayers Union; Americans for Tax Reform; Concord Coalition; Children's Defense Fund; NRA; Coalition to Stop Gun Violence; Planned Parenthood; National Right to Life Committee; NAACP; and ACLU.
They also quote from voting records (for folks who have voting records).
It's possible that they have distorted the meanings of votes, or positions of organizations, etc. However, the details about each candidate would seem fairly easy to check. For example, if they say that a candidate "received 'F' from the NRA", it ought to be fairly easy to check.
As to whether a bias in the phrasing of the questions can lead to a particular result, it's hard to tell. The fellow on NPR, the Undecided Voter, ended up with only a few percentage points difference between the Republican, Democratic, and Socialist candidates. All three were at the top of his list, at somewhere around 45%. That would lend some evidence to the proposition that if one is undecided, the results may indicate the reason for the lack of decision!
"Desktop Linux will account for about 5 percent of desktops shipped in 2004, according to Gartner, with 10.5 percent of the desktops in Asia shipping with Linux this year. However, the installed base of Linux will come to only 1.3 percent."
then:
"In 2008, Linux will account for 7.5 percent of PCs shipped, but only 2.6 percent of the installed base..."
Does anyone else notice that they are comparing shipments with installed base? Unless we were to assume that the entire installed base of PCs is thrown away and replaced each year, this is a bogus comparison.
It's similar in kind to comparisons of raw numbers with percentages. I start a new club. I'm the only member. Next year, I get someone else to join my club. I can report that I've grown my club's membership that year by 100%.
It was my impression that the WMD aspect was not the alleged use of the radio waves to affect people.
The radio waves are part of an entire system for the delivery of thermonuclear destruction upon our enemies. I believe that this is what they had in mind as being a WMD.
Slashdot Mirror
Quotes from that web site:
How new? The version number where this new feature appears would be nice, or even any version that includes it. I'm using 2.18, and don't see it. Am I just missing something, or was it added later? Thanks!
How about this: We remove from Linux the ability to create FAT filesystems. Seems to me this is similar to what happened with GIF images a few years ago. If someone on a Linux box wants to access a FAT filesystem, and they don't have the software to create the FAT filesystem themselves, then someone else had to create it for them. That someone else is either going to be:
So, it seems to me that this boils down to Linux users who don't deal with FAT not having to worry about it and Linux users who do deal with FAT having paid indirectly for the license through the software or device that creates such filesystems in the first place.
Is this really a big deal (other than philosophically)?
Although the primary idea behind 2001: ASO started out as a short story ("The Sentinel", I believe), Clarke did go back and create a full length 2001 book, mostly matching up with the movie.
In the book, Discovery was going to Saturn. There was the implication that Saturns rings, being there for a comparatively short time, were like a giant interplanetary billboard, intended only for a race of beings that, if the experiment succeeded, would be prepared to understand and act on it before the rings were gone. The "Making of 2001" book talks a bit about the decision to cut the flight short at Jupiter.
Naturally, with the change in destination to Jupiter, the subsequent books included plot elements revolving around it, rather than Saturn.
BTW, That was fixed in 4bsd.
Actually, that is only partly right, sorta.
Linux is a re-implementation of UNIX.
UNIX was named as a play-on-words, by folks that had been working on the Multics project. UNIX was an "emasculated" Multics.
For my personal use, I have a small handful of "strong" passphrases, one for each of a small handful of gpg/PGP keys. Each is over a dozen characters long. Each includes mixed case and non-alphanumerics. I'm guessing that in the absence of shoulder-surfing or keyboard sniffers, they are each secure for a lot longer than I'm likely to be around. They haven't changed in years. I remember them all.
On the other hand, my place of employment requires that I come up with a "strong" password every 30 days. About the time that I'm beginning to type my password from memory, I start getting warnings that I'd better start thinking of a new one. I finally decided that it just wasn't worth the effort to try to remember a new nonsense password every month, and now have my password recorded (encrypted with a strong password that has never changed) on my Palm Tungsten T5.
Oh, God! You couldn't be more wrong if you tried.
OK. You were right, in that the amendment had to do with militias, but after that one point you fairly jump off the path and run screaming off the cliff.
To properly read the amendment, it's necessary to look back at how our nation got to the the point of being a nation.
In the first 2 years of the revolution, our forces were made up of militias that supplied their own weapons with which to fight against the British, as the founding fathers had no weapons or weapon stockpiles with which to supply them. Nor would they have for 2 years, which is how long it took to put together the continental army for Washington to command to continue the fight.
So, the founding fathers acknowledged this in the right to bear arms, first by saying that militias are necessary to the defense of states. Then, by saying that since people are necessary to militias, their right to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed because, as stated, the people were where the militias' weapons came from. In some militias today, it's still where the weapons come from -- their members.
As for how many times a day a weapon or (as you state) a gun gets used to commit crimes against people, I would submit that a gun isn't necessary to commit these crimes. It is just that gun crime tends to be more reported to the general public than crimes committed by other means. For example, let's take the hockey dad incident. No gun or knife or other artifical weapon was used, but one father is just as dead, having been beaten to death by the other father. As another poster said, should we ban muscles as well?
Personally I don't have a gun, nor do I use drugs (legal or otherwise). But that doesn't mean that I'm against the right to bear arms. No one, not even you, knows what the future will bring. So, it's at least conceivable that, one day, the people of this land may again owe their safety and protection to people who do own guns. I didn't say they would -- just that it's conceivable.
Just because we have an Army and National Guard now doesn't mean we should get rid of that extra line of defense. Yes, without it, there wouldn't be any crimes commited with legal handguns. But illegal handgun crimes would continue. Only the crooks would be armed, as they could easily get arms on the black market, have them smuggled in across borders, or even under borders (as in the instance where drugs were being smuggled into the U.S. via a tunnel running between two houses on either side of the Mexican / U.S. border).
As for the battle flag crack, PLEASE! I won't even diginfy that statement.
I count 30: 99, 98, 96, 92, 89, 88, 85, 82, 80, 75, 72, 69, 63, 60, 57, 54, 50, 45, 40, 38, 35, 28, 25, 23, 20, 16, 15, 11, 4, and 2.
Is that enough to qualify me as a "gadget freak"?
Shouldn't that be GPS-Disabled Criminals?
If you are not "allowing pserver access at all", why do you need to worry about the userid of the CVS server? It seems to me that there's no reason to even be running the server if you aren't allowing pserver access. I've never run it on my CVS servers.
I would recommend structuring your build tree and makefiles in such a way that build products for different platforms are placed into (or built into) different directories. Thus, each platform's build products are kept distinct, and no make cleans are required.
On the original question: I have never heard anyone I respected suggest the inclusion of executable source code. There is just too much peril.
Also, there have been a couple of CDs of Open Source software ported to MS-Windows. I used BitTorrent to download them, and left the connection up for a few more days to share with others.
BTW, many of the "live CD" Linux distros will get their network configuration from a DHCP server. Try Knoppix (now in version 3.7) I fired it up on a system at work today, selecting the 2.6.9 kernel and it came up just fine. With previous releases of Knoppix, booting a 2.4.x kernel, I've also had no problems with the network.
Now, on the other hand, if this were providing power over an 802.11b/g connection, I'd be asking where to sign up!
Now, I'm not saying that everything we did was hard or time consuming, but we did stay up until 4am getting things up to basic functioning.
I'll be installing SuSE 9.2 on a home machine or two over the next couple of weeks. I'll try to make note of everything that needs to be done that does not seem "novice-friendly".
It's good to hear about a distro that can be recommended to Linux neophytes.
BTW, I hung around waiting for the machine because the medium-tech electronic postal scale on the other side of the lobby gave me three very different weights for the same envelope. sigh.
I guess I don't understand slashdot as well as I thought. I attempted to report on this at 8:01 am CST, but the article (which included a link to a news story for more details) was rejected. So, if the story wasn't interesting at 8am, why was it interesting 15 hours later? Thanks.
Isn't saying, "OCaml also has full support for object-oriented programming that fits in completely with OCaml's strong type system." equivalent to saying, "Ford Thunderbird also has full support for all fuels that meet its fuel requirements."?
I have full version 9.1. Saving $30+ sounds pretty good. What do I give up by buying the Upgrade version? In other words, what are the differences between full and upgrade versions? Thanks!
I think it's appropriate to reference the source of the article when possible. This one started out here, on the Christian Science Monitor.
They also quote from voting records (for folks who have voting records).
It's possible that they have distorted the meanings of votes, or positions of organizations, etc. However, the details about each candidate would seem fairly easy to check. For example, if they say that a candidate "received 'F' from the NRA", it ought to be fairly easy to check.
As to whether a bias in the phrasing of the questions can lead to a particular result, it's hard to tell. The fellow on NPR, the Undecided Voter, ended up with only a few percentage points difference between the Republican, Democratic, and Socialist candidates. All three were at the top of his list, at somewhere around 45%. That would lend some evidence to the proposition that if one is undecided, the results may indicate the reason for the lack of decision!"Desktop Linux will account for about 5 percent of desktops shipped in 2004, according to Gartner, with 10.5 percent of the desktops in Asia shipping with Linux this year. However, the installed base of Linux will come to only 1.3 percent."
then:
"In 2008, Linux will account for 7.5 percent of PCs shipped, but only 2.6 percent of the installed base..."
Does anyone else notice that they are comparing shipments with installed base? Unless we were to assume that the entire installed base of PCs is thrown away and replaced each year, this is a bogus comparison.
It's similar in kind to comparisons of raw numbers with percentages. I start a new club. I'm the only member. Next year, I get someone else to join my club. I can report that I've grown my club's membership that year by 100%.
The radio waves are part of an entire system for the delivery of thermonuclear destruction upon our enemies. I believe that this is what they had in mind as being a WMD.