I agree with you up to a point. However, make no mistake that there is a significant difference between a car I don't have to drive and the modes of public transit you have cited. To wit, a car (driven by me or a computer) will take me directly from A to B. No walking, no changing lines, etc. Aside from the fact that most people are incredibly lazy (I'm including myself in that number) the difference in time and convenience is significant. Yes there are cities where that difference is quite small (NYC, London, amongst a few others) but these places are very much the exception and not the rule.
Absolutely correct. Investigations of aviation accidents involving autopilot errors, and the study of human factors more broadly, have shown that humans are really bad at passively monitoring while automated systems perform all tasks. This should come as no surprise, I suppose, as doing so is incredibly boring making it very difficult to maintain focus and extremely easy to become distracted.
They're already receiving all DNS requests from the infected systems, I think they could probably handle serving up a lightweight web page in addition to this.
That this is a stupid patent and may, in fact, be prior art, doesn't mean Google's motivations are nefarious. Indeed, if you are correct that it is prior art, then all the more reason for Google to apply for this patent even if they have no intention of enforcing it. If Google could receive the patent despite prior art (or lack of originality), then another organization could possibly have done the same thing and then turned around and sued Google. If you had billions to lose and were working in a broken patent system, you would apply for some dumb patents too, just to cover your ass.
So if I find a book lying in the street can I pick it up and read it, or do I need to call the publisher to get a license? I think you're overstating the scope of copyright just a *tad*.
"Canadians hand count all votes before the nights end. We have preserved one of the cleanest examples of democratic election on the planet."
Well said. And online voting would destroy this. Canada does it very well right now. You get a ballot. You put an 'X' next to the candidate you support. Real people count all the Xs. It's not very sexy, but it works, and if there's any suspicion of tomfoolery there's a paper trail to look at.
We have a good electoral system not because we're inherently awesome as Canadians, but because our electoral system is based on good and sound ideas. Online voting is a (really cool but) bad idea.
You're right the patent is on the gene. Ok so they own BRCA1 and BRCA2. Fine so if we want to test for THEIR gene then we have to pay for the privilege. So let's make an analogy to a patent on a device. If I own the patent on a really useful device I have the exclusive right to sell it and reap the benefits of that ownership. But if that device injuries some of the users, well then I'm going to be liable. Well I say apply the same logic to the drug companies, sure we'll pay you for doing genetic tests, but if it shows my breast cancer is being fueled by a BRCA1 mutation, you're paying for my treatment!
Two points:
1)I don't think we can give too much credence to what we think stupid/crazy people will do in response to a certain policy. Personally, I'd be fine if amputees have a shot at competing in the Olympics and the cost is a few whack jobs cutting off their legs. I'd rather not see anyone lose their legs. But better that than deny these tremendous athletes the chance to compete in the world's most prestigious sporting event (despite having the technology to allow them to do it!).
2)If losing your legs and having prostheses put in is such an advantage how come this guy is over a second slower than the standard to even qualify for the Olympics?
I certainly agree that we're not quite as bad off as the U.S. with their two party system, but you've overstated the case quite a bit. First of all, at the federal level there are only 3 national parties that actually win seats in the House (I'm not sure where you got 4-5 from). Secondly, only two parties -Liberals and Conservatives- have ever controlled the federal government. Lastly, as much fun as it was to watch the Conservatives implode in 1993, that event left us with only the Liberals having a realistic shot at winning elections. As a result, we basically had a ONE party system from 1993-2004. Which, as far as democracy goes, is pretty bad.
Correct me if I'm wrong but one really easy way around this would be an encrypted VPN connection. They could probably block VPN connections. However, I'm betting a lot of the market for such a service would be people staying in touch with their offices. For many of these people, the value of an internet connection that doesn't allow VPN is significantly reduced. And obviously I'm just speculating, but the number of people willing to pay $10 might go down significantly once they know about restrictions such as no VPN and no VOIP.
Well, their stockholders SHOULD care, and so should Microsoft itself frankly. After all, why oh why did they spend boatloads of money developing Vista if they couldn't made those same dollars from the OEMs from machines preloaded with XP? In order to justify that cost, the development of Vista would at least need to be responsible for MS retaining it's current market share and revenues. XP (love it or loathe it) is doing a way better job of that right now that Vista.
And keeping BOTH refunds? Wow. Extremely generous. Seems that way. But they may not have had much of a choice. Presumably the alternative to giving both refunds would have been to take back the money paid into customers' Google Checkout accounts and issue a credit card refund instead. Ok. But what about people who already spent the money that was refunded into their GCheckout accounts? No cash for them?? Google could assume that because they spent the money that those customers were fine with receiving refund in that form. But inevitably some people would complain (in some cases probably justly so) that they spent the money on what they could using GCheckout, but would rather have purchased something else with that money if Google had given them cash. Since Google is essentially trying to reverse a PR screwup, having all those people filling the intarweb's tubes with bitching would exactly be considered a resounding success.
I don't think you're correct. The wording leaves it up to me as the user/distributor to decide what licence GPLv2 or GPLv3 to use the software under. So let's say I decide I want to use the software under GPLv2. Is there any provision in GPLv2 that requires me to accept the terms of GPLv3? No. It does require me to distribute derivative works under the GPLv2. So I do that, but ONLY that. (ie. I don't allow people to use my work under GPLv3). I'm pretty sure that would be legit.
Be careful! Call blocking (I think is what it's called) aka *67, stops residential call display from identifying your number. However, from what I understand it does not stop ANI, which is the commercial analouge of call display, from identifying your number.
I know nothing about this journal and you're quite possibly right, but it's worth noting that ISI impact factors are not without controversy and certainly aren't the be all and end all for determining the importance of a journal. For one thing you'd have to know the trend of impact factors of journals in the specific field you're looking at. Differences in citation patterns can cause whole fields to have generally higher (or lower) impact factors than other fields, but this doesn't necessarily reflect a meaningful difference between the fields or the journals involved.
There is nothing wrong with this... except, perhaps, if you hate freedom. I think you might have misspelled love, 'cause I hate freedom and I think this is best thing since Guantanamo Bay!
But why would I want to wait for DHCP and NTP do do their thing during bootup on my desktop/laptop. DHCP can run in the background, and time can synchronize any time, no need for it to be at bootup. Sure that makes perfect sense on a server which you won't be rebooting very often (hopefully!). But bootup time is a much bigger consideration on the desktop.
I've always been amazed at this. Did the framers of the constitution not realize that there was such a thing as inflation? Or is this just evidence that the constitution was never intended to be interpreted in a strictly literal sense, but rather taking into account the context of society/economy/etc. at the time.
Just to make this point clear. Microsoft DOES make an embedded OS. So presumably the makers of this appliacne COULD have chosen to use Windows Embedded. They didn't. Maybe that's not terribly significant to Microsoft's overall PR image. But that's the fact nonetheless.
Slashdot Mirror
I agree with you up to a point. However, make no mistake that there is a significant difference between a car I don't have to drive and the modes of public transit you have cited. To wit, a car (driven by me or a computer) will take me directly from A to B. No walking, no changing lines, etc. Aside from the fact that most people are incredibly lazy (I'm including myself in that number) the difference in time and convenience is significant. Yes there are cities where that difference is quite small (NYC, London, amongst a few others) but these places are very much the exception and not the rule.
Absolutely correct. Investigations of aviation accidents involving autopilot errors, and the study of human factors more broadly, have shown that humans are really bad at passively monitoring while automated systems perform all tasks. This should come as no surprise, I suppose, as doing so is incredibly boring making it very difficult to maintain focus and extremely easy to become distracted.
Hey don't sell them short! We only know about the pr0n surfing they're doing at work. They're probably putting in another solid 8 hours at home!
They're already receiving all DNS requests from the infected systems, I think they could probably handle serving up a lightweight web page in addition to this.
That this is a stupid patent and may, in fact, be prior art, doesn't mean Google's motivations are nefarious. Indeed, if you are correct that it is prior art, then all the more reason for Google to apply for this patent even if they have no intention of enforcing it. If Google could receive the patent despite prior art (or lack of originality), then another organization could possibly have done the same thing and then turned around and sued Google. If you had billions to lose and were working in a broken patent system, you would apply for some dumb patents too, just to cover your ass.
Mod this down. 0 isn't low enough.
So if I find a book lying in the street can I pick it up and read it, or do I need to call the publisher to get a license? I think you're overstating the scope of copyright just a *tad*.
"Canadians hand count all votes before the nights end. We have preserved one of the cleanest examples of democratic election on the planet." Well said. And online voting would destroy this. Canada does it very well right now. You get a ballot. You put an 'X' next to the candidate you support. Real people count all the Xs. It's not very sexy, but it works, and if there's any suspicion of tomfoolery there's a paper trail to look at. We have a good electoral system not because we're inherently awesome as Canadians, but because our electoral system is based on good and sound ideas. Online voting is a (really cool but) bad idea.
You're right the patent is on the gene. Ok so they own BRCA1 and BRCA2. Fine so if we want to test for THEIR gene then we have to pay for the privilege. So let's make an analogy to a patent on a device. If I own the patent on a really useful device I have the exclusive right to sell it and reap the benefits of that ownership. But if that device injuries some of the users, well then I'm going to be liable. Well I say apply the same logic to the drug companies, sure we'll pay you for doing genetic tests, but if it shows my breast cancer is being fueled by a BRCA1 mutation, you're paying for my treatment!
Two points:
1)I don't think we can give too much credence to what we think stupid/crazy people will do in response to a certain policy. Personally, I'd be fine if amputees have a shot at competing in the Olympics and the cost is a few whack jobs cutting off their legs. I'd rather not see anyone lose their legs. But better that than deny these tremendous athletes the chance to compete in the world's most prestigious sporting event (despite having the technology to allow them to do it!).
2)If losing your legs and having prostheses put in is such an advantage how come this guy is over a second slower than the standard to even qualify for the Olympics?
I certainly agree that we're not quite as bad off as the U.S. with their two party system, but you've overstated the case quite a bit. First of all, at the federal level there are only 3 national parties that actually win seats in the House (I'm not sure where you got 4-5 from). Secondly, only two parties -Liberals and Conservatives- have ever controlled the federal government. Lastly, as much fun as it was to watch the Conservatives implode in 1993, that event left us with only the Liberals having a realistic shot at winning elections. As a result, we basically had a ONE party system from 1993-2004. Which, as far as democracy goes, is pretty bad.
Correct me if I'm wrong but one really easy way around this would be an encrypted VPN connection. They could probably block VPN connections. However, I'm betting a lot of the market for such a service would be people staying in touch with their offices. For many of these people, the value of an internet connection that doesn't allow VPN is significantly reduced. And obviously I'm just speculating, but the number of people willing to pay $10 might go down significantly once they know about restrictions such as no VPN and no VOIP.
Here's my rebuttal: George W. Bush. Having a rich and powerful family is the only reason he is where is.
Well, their stockholders SHOULD care, and so should Microsoft itself frankly. After all, why oh why did they spend boatloads of money developing Vista if they couldn't made those same dollars from the OEMs from machines preloaded with XP? In order to justify that cost, the development of Vista would at least need to be responsible for MS retaining it's current market share and revenues. XP (love it or loathe it) is doing a way better job of that right now that Vista.
I don't think you're correct. The wording leaves it up to me as the user/distributor to decide what licence GPLv2 or GPLv3 to use the software under. So let's say I decide I want to use the software under GPLv2. Is there any provision in GPLv2 that requires me to accept the terms of GPLv3? No. It does require me to distribute derivative works under the GPLv2. So I do that, but ONLY that. (ie. I don't allow people to use my work under GPLv3). I'm pretty sure that would be legit.
Be careful! Call blocking (I think is what it's called) aka *67, stops residential call display from identifying your number. However, from what I understand it does not stop ANI, which is the commercial analouge of call display, from identifying your number.
I know nothing about this journal and you're quite possibly right, but it's worth noting that ISI impact factors are not without controversy and certainly aren't the be all and end all for determining the importance of a journal. For one thing you'd have to know the trend of impact factors of journals in the specific field you're looking at. Differences in citation patterns can cause whole fields to have generally higher (or lower) impact factors than other fields, but this doesn't necessarily reflect a meaningful difference between the fields or the journals involved.
But why would I want to wait for DHCP and NTP do do their thing during bootup on my desktop/laptop. DHCP can run in the background, and time can synchronize any time, no need for it to be at bootup. Sure that makes perfect sense on a server which you won't be rebooting very often (hopefully!). But bootup time is a much bigger consideration on the desktop.
I'm not sure where you got your info from. Here's the whois info on gmail.co.uk:
Request: gmail.co.uk
Domain name:
gmail.co.uk
Registrant:
Google Inc
Registrant type:
Non-UK Corporation
Registrant's address:
1600 Amphitheatre parkway
Mountian View
CA
9403 3
United States
I've always been amazed at this. Did the framers of the constitution not realize that there was such a thing as inflation? Or is this just evidence that the constitution was never intended to be interpreted in a strictly literal sense, but rather taking into account the context of society/economy/etc. at the time.
Just to make this point clear. Microsoft DOES make an embedded OS. So presumably the makers of this appliacne COULD have chosen to use Windows Embedded. They didn't. Maybe that's not terribly significant to Microsoft's overall PR image. But that's the fact nonetheless.
That simply means it's hard to read, not necessarily well written though.
No it doesn't! You just have to click harder...trust me.