We might not get any problems because of static member variables. Each VM will create its mutable own data and objects, but the code and constants will probably remain in one place. The ratio of mutable/constant (overall, including code) in the Java libraries is probably very low.
Until the consumer screams loud enough, none of them have an incentive to lower the minimum contract length.
Consumers don't need to scream, they just need to vote with their dollars. If everybody were going to carriers with contract lengths of 1 year or less, you could be certain that other carriers would change. People don't, so the carriers don't
This isn't the first time they did that. I believe they actually have two concurrent versioning schemes: the core language (1->2->5) and the JDK/whatever (1.0->1.1->1.2->1.3->1.4->1.5). It's a useful concept, having these two different schemes, but the problem is that no one generally distinguishes between them.
You still have to worry about balance with these suits. Try to lift a 1000 pound palette with one of these and you'll soon find yourself laying on top of it.
Maybe he should move to the city. Then, the police will have to stop every other car in the vicinity when a robot moves around. They'll never get anywhere.
Each bundle of nanotubes in this switch uses more than one nanotube (AFAIK). It's possible that the nanotubes could slide along each other and break their bonds, breaking the circuit.
Just because you can cite something, doesn't mean you always should. Wikipedia probably isn't the best cite for the meat of your argument, but it can be useful for peripheral issues. If you're allowed to cite We Never Went to the Moon or Of Pandas and People, then you should be able to cite Wikipedia. There are lots of crappy books, movies, and journal articles. Just because something is citable, that doesn't mean it should be cited.
sure it couldn't be cited because the information there is simply too fluid and couldn't be counted on to remain unchanged over time.
If you're allowed to cite any other web page, why can't you cite a Wikipedia article. As long as you put the date you accessed it in the citation, what information was on the page is even less ambiguous than the webpage.
Even with regenerative breaks, etc. hybrids have to be charged, and the charge comes from electricity. Electricity is generated primarily by coal plants.
You don't know even the first thing about what a hybrid car is, do you? Not one clue. You don't even know that (almost all) hybrids aren't charged from the wall, but from their own internal engines. How sad.
That's extremely ironic, considering that Gene Rodenberry wanted Star Trek to be a "wagon train to the stars." The original series, at least, was supposed to be a western set in space.
Are you saying that sharing a copy of a movie electronically without permission is legal? I thought the No Electronic Theft act made it a felony, i.e. illegal.
Funds will have to be spent on this some day. Why should we wait until we do have a viable tether, and hold up construction then, when we can just as easily test climbers now, in parallel with trying to design a tether?
Of course. Obviously, that would be extremely hard to do. I expect that we would see the power of assembly language->HLL translators and binary obfuscators increasing greatly, in a sort of arms race. The GPL makes it much easier to modify software, as it doesn't just require the source code, but the "preferred form of the work for making modifications to it."
It wouldn't be impossible to modify the software in a copyright-less world, just much harder than it is in the Free world.
But the GPL offers more protection to the original author than the lack of copyright laws would. If there were no copyright laws, then you wouldn't have to redistribute the source code and any modifications you made to it. A GPL in that vein would require that any derivative work based on the program would also have the GPL applied, and that the authors of the derivative and original works would allow anyone else to distribute those works (effectively, IANAL, etc). The GPL goes above and beyond that, and requires you to redistribute the source code. That is not merely the lack of copyright law.
Slashdot Mirror
We might not get any problems because of static member variables. Each VM will create its mutable own data and objects, but the code and constants will probably remain in one place. The ratio of mutable/constant (overall, including code) in the Java libraries is probably very low.
Until the consumer screams loud enough, none of them have an incentive to lower the minimum contract length.
Consumers don't need to scream, they just need to vote with their dollars. If everybody were going to carriers with contract lengths of 1 year or less, you could be certain that other carriers would change. People don't, so the carriers don't
Yes, apparently CinePaint is relatively popular for color images with between 24 and 96 bpp.
This isn't the first time they did that. I believe they actually have two concurrent versioning schemes: the core language (1->2->5) and the JDK/whatever (1.0->1.1->1.2->1.3->1.4->1.5). It's a useful concept, having these two different schemes, but the problem is that no one generally distinguishes between them.
You still have to worry about balance with these suits. Try to lift a 1000 pound palette with one of these and you'll soon find yourself laying on top of it.
Maybe he should move to the city. Then, the police will have to stop every other car in the vicinity when a robot moves around. They'll never get anywhere.
Each bundle of nanotubes in this switch uses more than one nanotube (AFAIK). It's possible that the nanotubes could slide along each other and break their bonds, breaking the circuit.
Of course, you get tired more quickly.
Individual sovereignity? What about the individual's right to break TPM? They don't even work towards their own stated principles.
Just because you can cite something, doesn't mean you always should. Wikipedia probably isn't the best cite for the meat of your argument, but it can be useful for peripheral issues. If you're allowed to cite We Never Went to the Moon or Of Pandas and People, then you should be able to cite Wikipedia. There are lots of crappy books, movies, and journal articles. Just because something is citable, that doesn't mean it should be cited.
sure it couldn't be cited because the information there is simply too fluid and couldn't be counted on to remain unchanged over time.
If you're allowed to cite any other web page, why can't you cite a Wikipedia article. As long as you put the date you accessed it in the citation, what information was on the page is even less ambiguous than the webpage.
It's called Mirrordot. Get Greasemonkey for Firefox and the right script, and Mirrordot links will be inserted into the Slashdot story. Very nice.
They've already released their filesystem: GmailFS.
Mod points are unnecessary; you don't need them. In fact, you should be happy that you don't have them.
Running on a 64 and 32 bit OS respectively?
That's what it says in the article. Windows x64 for 64 bits, and presumably regular Windows for 32 bits.
If the original game uses OpenGL, then it's a lot easier to port than a game that uses a 2D api. OpenGL is crossplatform, while most 2D api's are not.
Even with regenerative breaks, etc. hybrids have to be charged, and the charge comes from electricity. Electricity is generated primarily by coal plants.
You don't know even the first thing about what a hybrid car is, do you? Not one clue. You don't even know that (almost all) hybrids aren't charged from the wall, but from their own internal engines. How sad.
That's extremely ironic, considering that Gene Rodenberry wanted Star Trek to be a "wagon train to the stars." The original series, at least, was supposed to be a western set in space.
No, I think that's part of the point. If you've modified the source at all, you're supposed to give people the version that you're using.
Are you saying that sharing a copy of a movie electronically without permission is legal? I thought the No Electronic Theft act made it a felony, i.e. illegal.
Everything I've heard of (squid beaks in sperm whale stomachs, for example) suggests that its sperm whales that eat the giant squid.
Funds will have to be spent on this some day. Why should we wait until we do have a viable tether, and hold up construction then, when we can just as easily test climbers now, in parallel with trying to design a tether?
Of course. Obviously, that would be extremely hard to do. I expect that we would see the power of assembly language->HLL translators and binary obfuscators increasing greatly, in a sort of arms race. The GPL makes it much easier to modify software, as it doesn't just require the source code, but the "preferred form of the work for making modifications to it."
It wouldn't be impossible to modify the software in a copyright-less world, just much harder than it is in the Free world.
But the GPL offers more protection to the original author than the lack of copyright laws would. If there were no copyright laws, then you wouldn't have to redistribute the source code and any modifications you made to it. A GPL in that vein would require that any derivative work based on the program would also have the GPL applied, and that the authors of the derivative and original works would allow anyone else to distribute those works (effectively, IANAL, etc).
The GPL goes above and beyond that, and requires you to redistribute the source code. That is not merely the lack of copyright law.
Look lower on the page - it says 1 teraflop specifically.