1. There are more German auto makers than VW.;) I hope you're not saying your Toyota is as good as or better than any car from BMW, for instance. (Before denouncing that comparison as 'unfair', I should remind you that the BMW 1-series models start at under US$30k, making them price-competitive with mid-range Toyotas)
2. ConsumerReports is poor gauge for automotive products, IMHO. They base their results on surveys, rather than actual knowledge of the products. There are far better companies that produce far better (and more accurate) surveys, such as Polk Automotive, which are tempered with knowledge of automotibles and the automotive industry in general.
3. Who said anything about Microsoft products? My comment was directed at Apple products.
It may be just me but I really don't get why apple has such a big fanbase, seeing as how they treat their customers...
Well, ask yourself this: Why do some of the top brands of anything have such a big fanbase? Why do so many people go to McDonald's? I mean, McDonald's has food that "tastes like sh** but you can eat it." Why do so many people like Subway? Why do so many people people drive Toyotas?
These are all fairly mediocre products. Don't get me wrong -- Toyota produces a quality product, but it's just not as good as some of the major European brands (let's face it, the Germans know how to engineer good cars!)
It comes down to one word: Marketing.
Know who your target audience is, learn to speak their language, learn to cater to their attitudes and whims and you could sell air conditioners to Eskimos.
What does this say about the Democratic party when the bill breezes through their hands unfettered? And the Republicans are saying no?
It says that Hollywood has paid the Democrats rather well and not so much for the Republicans. But then again, it's been that way for a very long time -- Hollywood makes no secret of favoring the Democrats and Democratic causes. Some of the largest contributors to the Democratic Party and to Democratic candidates for office include some of the biggest names in Hollywood -- Steven Spielberg, David Geffen, etc.
"The Bush administration is opposing sweeping legislation granting it the ability to prosecute civil cases of copyright infringement" I mean, it's early so maybe I am sleep-hallucinating that the Bush Administration or DoJ actually refuses power.
They're not refusing power so much as refusing to take responsibility. And rightly so! Why should the taxpayers foot the legal bills for the **AA?
Well, like I said, you need an Exchange server to use Outlook. On the other hand, if you need a mail client with good IMAP support for Windows you know where to find it.
This would be similar to Linux's repositories, but you would not be able to change the list of download servers
Linux doesn't have any 'repositories'. Ubuntu, Fedora, SuSE, Debian, and Mandriva have repositories, but there is no 'repository' concept for the kernel.
(call me a pedant!)
Also, at least as far Debian-based package managers (Synaptic, apt-get), these are not 'download programs'. They typically call 'wget' or 'curl' to download stuff for them. (I think YUM does too, but I haven't used it in a while).
I think you should try speaking slower to him. He thinks Outlook Express^W^WWindows Mail is a good mail client, after all. (Now, MS fanboys, be careful here....I actually *like* Outlook (the real deal) -- as long as it's set up sanely (i.e., Security Zone is set to 'Restricted sites') and the Exchange server has good antivirus and antispam filtering -- and actually use Outlook when I have to use Windows.)
And even then, couldn't they have found some sort of invasion of privacy statute?
Nope. They're using information that's already publicly available. All real estate purchases are a matter of public record (by necessity). The rest of the info from bios just seems to come from newspapers or websites or whatever -- remember, these are prominent people, so they get talked about lot in the media and on the Internet.
400 million addresses is still 400 million addresses more than we had.
But actually, if we include U.S. government blocks (DISA, etc.), the number is closer 34. That's more than half a billion addresses.
That's not even counting the reserved blocks above 240.0.0.0/8. You can add in another 15 (if we skip 255.0.0.0/8, which might foul things up) That's another 240 million addresses.
Let's add that to our 544 million, and now we've got more than 3/4s of a billion addresses.
How many more do you think we need in the next 5 years or so?
There would be a lot more available addresses if companies that were given entire/8 blocks in the 80s and 90s (Ford, IBM, AT&T, Halliburton, etc.) were to give back those blocks. Most of those companies aren't even really using their/8 blocks anymore, with most of the addresses going unadvertised.
And are programs really so intangible? They have a physical representation in magnetic bits on a physical hard disk, and they have a physical representation in electrical signals when loaded in memory. These physical representations are just too small for you to see, and their usage characteristics are far more important than their physical representation. But this is just arguing about trivialities
Agreed on the trivialities part, but they do not have the same physical representation when stored on, say, optical discs as opposed to a physical hard disk. And they have yet another physical representation when sent across a wire or optical cable. In fact, every time software changes the media it resides on, it changes its physical representation. Like, say, a book. See what I mean?;)
Let's say you are an architect. Your individual schematics are protected by copyright, but not patentable because, as you have noted, the work is a creative work and has copyright to protect it. Then one day you have a flash of brilliance and design a support column that can bear 10 times the weight of current designs with only half the necessary material. That is a patentable idea, of course. Then you go and use your patented idea in your designs, and your customers are ecstatic and your competition is ground to dust (those who choose not to license your patent).
Okay, but it's obvious you don't know many architects...:)
How is this any different from the software solution that provides a new way to do something that is faster, lighter, or more convenient than the currently known methods? Is it just because the "stuff" is ephemeral bits and not a solid marble column?
The problem is that there are very few software solutions that are truly unique or innovative. The patent office actually employs architects and engineers to examine patents related to architecture. The patent office mostly doesn't employ computer science experts and they are all too quick to hand out a patent.
In concept, I agree with you, but in terms of actual execution? Tell me how the FAT filesystem or the Office Open XML file format is worthy of patent protection.
Is "non-obvious" really a good measure of patentability?
Yes.
Patents in gun designs or refrigerators or pens or book bindings are typically on novel things -- designs that improve functionality, appearance or both. These also relate to a tangible product. Patent examiners can easily see the novelty involved (are there other guns that do what that gun does or are there other refrigerators that have as polished a finish?). In software patents, it's not so easy.
The problem with software patents is that software is not a tangible thing. It is also not manufactured -- it is crafted by creative individuals. Intangible, creatively-produced art has other laws designed to protect it -- copyright laws. You can't get a patent on a plot or a theme in a novel, right? Then why should you be able to get a patent on a software algorithm?
I'm guessing the GP is running separate X instances (no Twinview nor Xinerama), like me. You can't drag windows across screens with that kind of setup.
The other problem is if you're running Firefox under both the Windows VM and the native OS, with your home directory mapped to your user profile directory (can be done with Samba running on the Linux OS)
Slashdot Mirror
1. There are more German auto makers than VW. ;) I hope you're not saying your Toyota is as good as or better than any car from BMW, for instance. (Before denouncing that comparison as 'unfair', I should remind you that the BMW 1-series models start at under US$30k, making them price-competitive with mid-range Toyotas)
2. ConsumerReports is poor gauge for automotive products, IMHO. They base their results on surveys, rather than actual knowledge of the products. There are far better companies that produce far better (and more accurate) surveys, such as Polk Automotive, which are tempered with knowledge of automotibles and the automotive industry in general.
3. Who said anything about Microsoft products? My comment was directed at Apple products.
It may be just me but I really don't get why apple has such a big fanbase, seeing as how they treat their customers...
Well, ask yourself this: Why do some of the top brands of anything have such a big fanbase? Why do so many people go to McDonald's? I mean, McDonald's has food that "tastes like sh** but you can eat it." Why do so many people like Subway? Why do so many people people drive Toyotas?
These are all fairly mediocre products. Don't get me wrong -- Toyota produces a quality product, but it's just not as good as some of the major European brands (let's face it, the Germans know how to engineer good cars!)
It comes down to one word: Marketing.
Know who your target audience is, learn to speak their language, learn to cater to their attitudes and whims and you could sell air conditioners to Eskimos.
What does this say about the Democratic party when the bill breezes through their hands unfettered? And the Republicans are saying no?
It says that Hollywood has paid the Democrats rather well and not so much for the Republicans. But then again, it's been that way for a very long time -- Hollywood makes no secret of favoring the Democrats and Democratic causes. Some of the largest contributors to the Democratic Party and to Democratic candidates for office include some of the biggest names in Hollywood -- Steven Spielberg, David Geffen, etc.
"The Bush administration is opposing sweeping legislation granting it the ability to prosecute civil cases of copyright infringement" I mean, it's early so maybe I am sleep-hallucinating that the Bush Administration or DoJ actually refuses power.
They're not refusing power so much as refusing to take responsibility. And rightly so! Why should the taxpayers foot the legal bills for the **AA?
There pretty stupid at the DOJ.
Here here!!
Sheesh. You guys our such loosers.
Agreed, but installing it as an extension after the fact isn't all that hard.
I dunno. The debugger didn't seem too difficult to me, at least with Turbo Prolog (now called Visual Prolog).
Well, like I said, you need an Exchange server to use Outlook. On the other hand, if you need a mail client with good IMAP support for Windows you know where to find it.
Vista is just an evolution on XP. There's nothing 'revolutionary'. Vista is XP with prettier eye candy (Aero) and sudo (UAC).
This would be similar to Linux's repositories, but you would not be able to change the list of download servers
Linux doesn't have any 'repositories'. Ubuntu, Fedora, SuSE, Debian, and Mandriva have repositories, but there is no 'repository' concept for the kernel.
(call me a pedant!)
Also, at least as far Debian-based package managers (Synaptic, apt-get), these are not 'download programs'. They typically call 'wget' or 'curl' to download stuff for them. (I think YUM does too, but I haven't used it in a while).
Cached IMAP is supported in a few clients, Firebird and kmail come to mind...
You mean Thunderbird. 'Firebird' was the second name ('Phoenix' being the first) of Mozilla Firefox before it became Mozilla Firefox.
Also, aside from Thunderbird and Kmail, Evolution does as well.
Erm, wasn't included until SP1, but other than that you're right.
I think you should try speaking slower to him. He thinks Outlook Express^W^WWindows Mail is a good mail client, after all. (Now, MS fanboys, be careful here....I actually *like* Outlook (the real deal) -- as long as it's set up sanely (i.e., Security Zone is set to 'Restricted sites') and the Exchange server has good antivirus and antispam filtering -- and actually use Outlook when I have to use Windows.)
Like, say, writing Emacs or taking on the onerous task of replacing Unix with entirely Free software?
Some of those lawyers probably are crooked Wall Street investors. Ha!
And even then, couldn't they have found some sort of invasion of privacy statute?
Nope. They're using information that's already publicly available. All real estate purchases are a matter of public record (by necessity). The rest of the info from bios just seems to come from newspapers or websites or whatever -- remember, these are prominent people, so they get talked about lot in the media and on the Internet.
Who is General Failure...?
Funny. I thought his name was spelled 'Petraeus'.
$ ed
help
?
list
?
quit
?
bye
?
die
?
FSCK OFF and DIE you fscking BASTARD!!!
?
^C
Whatever happened to...?
(*) "Invalid command" string on my T.A.G. BBS in the late 80s/early 90s.
400 million addresses is still 400 million addresses more than we had.
But actually, if we include U.S. government blocks (DISA, etc.), the number is closer 34. That's more than half a billion addresses.
That's not even counting the reserved blocks above 240.0.0.0/8. You can add in another 15 (if we skip 255.0.0.0/8, which might foul things up) That's another 240 million addresses.
Let's add that to our 544 million, and now we've got more than 3/4s of a billion addresses.
How many more do you think we need in the next 5 years or so?
There would be a lot more available addresses if companies that were given entire /8 blocks in the 80s and 90s (Ford, IBM, AT&T, Halliburton, etc.) were to give back those blocks. Most of those companies aren't even really using their /8 blocks anymore, with most of the addresses going unadvertised.
And are programs really so intangible? They have a physical representation in magnetic bits on a physical hard disk, and they have a physical representation in electrical signals when loaded in memory. These physical representations are just too small for you to see, and their usage characteristics are far more important than their physical representation. But this is just arguing about trivialities
Agreed on the trivialities part, but they do not have the same physical representation when stored on, say, optical discs as opposed to a physical hard disk. And they have yet another physical representation when sent across a wire or optical cable. In fact, every time software changes the media it resides on, it changes its physical representation. Like, say, a book. See what I mean? ;)
Let's say you are an architect. Your individual schematics are protected by copyright, but not patentable because, as you have noted, the work is a creative work and has copyright to protect it. Then one day you have a flash of brilliance and design a support column that can bear 10 times the weight of current designs with only half the necessary material. That is a patentable idea, of course. Then you go and use your patented idea in your designs, and your customers are ecstatic and your competition is ground to dust (those who choose not to license your patent).
Okay, but it's obvious you don't know many architects ... :)
How is this any different from the software solution that provides a new way to do something that is faster, lighter, or more convenient than the currently known methods? Is it just because the "stuff" is ephemeral bits and not a solid marble column?
The problem is that there are very few software solutions that are truly unique or innovative. The patent office actually employs architects and engineers to examine patents related to architecture. The patent office mostly doesn't employ computer science experts and they are all too quick to hand out a patent.
In concept, I agree with you, but in terms of actual execution? Tell me how the FAT filesystem or the Office Open XML file format is worthy of patent protection.
There were no black helicopters.
Thanks,
unnamed government agency who is not the NSA, DIA, DSA, CIA or FBI
Is "non-obvious" really a good measure of patentability?
Yes.
Patents in gun designs or refrigerators or pens or book bindings are typically on novel things -- designs that improve functionality, appearance or both. These also relate to a tangible product. Patent examiners can easily see the novelty involved (are there other guns that do what that gun does or are there other refrigerators that have as polished a finish?). In software patents, it's not so easy.
The problem with software patents is that software is not a tangible thing. It is also not manufactured -- it is crafted by creative individuals. Intangible, creatively-produced art has other laws designed to protect it -- copyright laws. You can't get a patent on a plot or a theme in a novel, right? Then why should you be able to get a patent on a software algorithm?
I'm guessing the GP is running separate X instances (no Twinview nor Xinerama), like me. You can't drag windows across screens with that kind of setup.
The other problem is if you're running Firefox under both the Windows VM and the native OS, with your home directory mapped to your user profile directory (can be done with Samba running on the Linux OS)