This is why it is so absurd that the only election that matters to the vast majority is the Presidency. He can't wipe his butt unless Congress writes a law allowing it.
Wake up, folks. Pay attention to whom you are electing to represent you in Congress. They are the only ones who can actually enact "change" of any kind.
But I beg to differ with your analysis. Nothing about C# promotes what you are describing. It is similar in SLOC (Source Lines of Code) per function point as Java and C++ (link, which shows that Visual Basic actually averages less than any of those languages).
Regardless of language... if you have 10,000 lines in a source code file, you're doing it wrong.
Changing the license of existing code does not affect those who have copied/derived/distributed/etc. under those terms. So long as someone out there is mirroring the code, you are essentially correct.
Newly derived code may be changed by the copyright holder, since nobody has it and can claim to be licensed to it. The next release of Android may be closed since the changes were never released under open source. It doesn't change the fact that you can distribute the old code, or modify that code on your own to make it more like the new version or compatible with the open APIs for the new version.
(IANAL and all that. This is my understanding of open source in general; I don't know about the particulars of the Apache license.)
Control channels are not free. The iPhone creates many short-lived connections over control channels to reduce battery consumption. Up to that point, most phones maintained fewer longer connections. This change, alongside the iPhone's rapid growth, was blamed as a major cause for reducing AT&T's service quality. While the total bandwidth was capable of handling that many phones, it couldn't handle that many control channel connections. (This is from memory, please correct if I got this wrong.)
I don't know if this would impact text messaging, or even if text messaging would impact call quality of service.
I still have my grandfathered unlimited plan, but a two-year contract.
Does the new contract spell out details for the "unlimited" plan? I'm just speculating, perhaps they changed the terms to allow throttling for grandfathered accounts.
MP3 is compressed, so the two extracted 160kbps mp3s can't just be added together to exactly recreate the original. WAV is easier for this question, separating every other sample into its own file and halving the sample rate of each.
I would think that this would be the same as splitting an image of copyrighted text, such that every other pixel goes into another file (filling with white or a copy of the adjacent pixel).
In the image case, it would be easy to put one of the copies through various filters and OCR the result, producing the original text in its entirety. I'm pretty sure this is illegal since the text is the material under copyright, not the representation of the text. The same could be said about sound media. The record of the performance is copyrighted, and any work produced from that performance is protected (subject to fair use).
There are a lot of people on here smarter than I am, so please debunk or clarify where needed.
It's a problem when people get what they don't deserve at the expense of people who deserve but don't get. This can work both ways. Some rich people make 1000 times my salary but obviously don't work1000 times as hard as I do or contribute 1000 times as much to society. Some poor people sit around all day and have lifestyles that are not that far from my own.
But how do you define or measure "things that were unintended by the original designers"? As a general concept, how do I know beforehand that what I am doing is unintended?
The guy who invented glass probably never intended it to be flown at thousands of miles per hour in outer space. He probably never intended it to be used as a keyboard on an iPad. So, does that mean that those applications are illegal or immoral?
The URL hack was immoral because once the information was viewed and understood to be private personally identifiable information, it should have been destroyed. Yet instead, the "hackers" decided to continue using the exploit to obtain more private PII.
It's the same as breaking into my house. It's fairly easy to do, just kick the door in or break my window. But that doesn't mean it's moral or legal.
The problem is that the consumer will have no competitor to run to. The provider forces the competition out of the market by subsidizing their new product with profits from an existing product.
I understand that it's possible for a competitor to then come to market, but then Google has enough money to pull a similar strategy: charge less than the competitor needs to charge to stay in business, and raise prices again once the competition dies.
Ah, I understand now. So each individual copy of the mp3 is dually material and non-material, until observed, at which time it becomes $80,000 per copy.
Reconciling quantum physics with general relativity is much easier than making sense of the RIAA.
the state either loses airline travel or knowingly allows TSA to continue using harmful levels of radiation on travelers within its jurisdiction
Such a story would make headlines well in advance of laws being passed. They could hope to sit it out and see how public opinion influences things at the national level.
It's not just about the cost. Today's games also focus on building up a community. Even games like Halo have a huge following of people who play just to have fun with their friends, and who would never play if not for that social interaction. (I am one of them.)
If Joe Blow can't buy a reduced-cost copy of Halo, he won't be part of the growth of such a community. And if I can't sell my copy, I might not be willing to try it out to begin with.
I have to disagree. The burden of proof should be on those who claim the system is legitimate and free from corruption. They are the ones asking the populous to trust that the system is fair.
1) 1440 minutes is the number of minutes in a day, not a month. Each month on average has 43,828.8 minutes. The AT&T slider is not a representation of maximum possible data usage.
2) As another poster pointed out, who streams Netflix 24x7 on the least cost-effective plan? $30 for 3GB/month would change the original calculation from $68,376 to $360 per year, the original value of the unlimited plan. (But at 43K minutes/month on either large plan would make it $10,264/year.)
3) Please, for the love, don't use a mobile plan for streaming 24x7. Buying a house with a hard line is a much better investment. $10K/year will pay for a reasonable mortgage, and you get to keep the house afterwards.
As a pro-lifer, I simply believe in the civil liberties of every unborn child.
Please don't assume that the "pro-choice" side is the only side for upholding civil liberties. "Your rights end where my rights begin." It comes down to a difference in opinion about whose rights are more important; I believe the unborn child's right to life is a liberty far more important than the mother's right to a convenient life.
(Not trying to start a flame war. I understand and accept that sometimes, it's about more than just convenience.)
Slashdot Mirror
The fault lies with congress.
This is why it is so absurd that the only election that matters to the vast majority is the Presidency. He can't wipe his butt unless Congress writes a law allowing it.
Wake up, folks. Pay attention to whom you are electing to represent you in Congress. They are the only ones who can actually enact "change" of any kind.
"Before you ____ my ____...."
Please, step into this side room while we fill in those blanks for you.
The MVVM pattern may be able to help on WPF.
But I beg to differ with your analysis. Nothing about C# promotes what you are describing. It is similar in SLOC (Source Lines of Code) per function point as Java and C++ (link, which shows that Visual Basic actually averages less than any of those languages).
Regardless of language... if you have 10,000 lines in a source code file, you're doing it wrong.
Who said anything about "giving" ideas? Those things cost money, you know.
I thought we learned a long time ago not to use only color, especially red and green, to distinguish between signage.
Changing the license of existing code does not affect those who have copied/derived/distributed/etc. under those terms. So long as someone out there is mirroring the code, you are essentially correct.
Newly derived code may be changed by the copyright holder, since nobody has it and can claim to be licensed to it. The next release of Android may be closed since the changes were never released under open source. It doesn't change the fact that you can distribute the old code, or modify that code on your own to make it more like the new version or compatible with the open APIs for the new version.
(IANAL and all that. This is my understanding of open source in general; I don't know about the particulars of the Apache license.)
Control channels are not free. The iPhone creates many short-lived connections over control channels to reduce battery consumption. Up to that point, most phones maintained fewer longer connections. This change, alongside the iPhone's rapid growth, was blamed as a major cause for reducing AT&T's service quality. While the total bandwidth was capable of handling that many phones, it couldn't handle that many control channel connections. (This is from memory, please correct if I got this wrong.)
I don't know if this would impact text messaging, or even if text messaging would impact call quality of service.
I still have my grandfathered unlimited plan, but a two-year contract.
Does the new contract spell out details for the "unlimited" plan? I'm just speculating, perhaps they changed the terms to allow throttling for grandfathered accounts.
I just hope they don't abandon good programming languages for the brokenness that is HTML and JavaScript.
Sorry, but I refuse to believe that the crapload that is and has always been HTML will one day be the only choice.
As a huge fan of fluent code
And to note, every stable release of C# (the latest being 4.0) has enabled more and better fluent syntax.
I think the upcoming C# 5 is the first new release that doesn't really add anything useful for fluent syntax.
MP3 is compressed, so the two extracted 160kbps mp3s can't just be added together to exactly recreate the original. WAV is easier for this question, separating every other sample into its own file and halving the sample rate of each.
I would think that this would be the same as splitting an image of copyrighted text, such that every other pixel goes into another file (filling with white or a copy of the adjacent pixel).
In the image case, it would be easy to put one of the copies through various filters and OCR the result, producing the original text in its entirety. I'm pretty sure this is illegal since the text is the material under copyright, not the representation of the text. The same could be said about sound media. The record of the performance is copyrighted, and any work produced from that performance is protected (subject to fair use).
There are a lot of people on here smarter than I am, so please debunk or clarify where needed.
1. The rich always have it better.
This isn't the problem.
It's a problem when people get what they don't deserve at the expense of people who deserve but don't get. This can work both ways. Some rich people make 1000 times my salary but obviously don't work1000 times as hard as I do or contribute 1000 times as much to society. Some poor people sit around all day and have lifestyles that are not that far from my own.
But how do you define or measure "things that were unintended by the original designers"? As a general concept, how do I know beforehand that what I am doing is unintended?
The guy who invented glass probably never intended it to be flown at thousands of miles per hour in outer space. He probably never intended it to be used as a keyboard on an iPad. So, does that mean that those applications are illegal or immoral?
The URL hack was immoral because once the information was viewed and understood to be private personally identifiable information, it should have been destroyed. Yet instead, the "hackers" decided to continue using the exploit to obtain more private PII.
It's the same as breaking into my house. It's fairly easy to do, just kick the door in or break my window. But that doesn't mean it's moral or legal.
The problem is that the consumer will have no competitor to run to. The provider forces the competition out of the market by subsidizing their new product with profits from an existing product.
I understand that it's possible for a competitor to then come to market, but then Google has enough money to pull a similar strategy: charge less than the competitor needs to charge to stay in business, and raise prices again once the competition dies.
Ah, I understand now. So each individual copy of the mp3 is dually material and non-material, until observed, at which time it becomes $80,000 per copy.
Reconciling quantum physics with general relativity is much easier than making sense of the RIAA.
Since soldiers will be using this, I can enable auto-aim without being called a noob.
the state either loses airline travel or knowingly allows TSA to continue using harmful levels of radiation on travelers within its jurisdiction
Such a story would make headlines well in advance of laws being passed. They could hope to sit it out and see how public opinion influences things at the national level.
Legally, is there any reason the states can't do this today?
The radiation is used for taking the image. You can be assured that more goes into the machine than out of it.
It's not just about the cost. Today's games also focus on building up a community. Even games like Halo have a huge following of people who play just to have fun with their friends, and who would never play if not for that social interaction. (I am one of them.)
If Joe Blow can't buy a reduced-cost copy of Halo, he won't be part of the growth of such a community. And if I can't sell my copy, I might not be willing to try it out to begin with.
I have to disagree. The burden of proof should be on those who claim the system is legitimate and free from corruption. They are the ones asking the populous to trust that the system is fair.
So many things wrong with this. Where do I start?
1) 1440 minutes is the number of minutes in a day, not a month. Each month on average has 43,828.8 minutes. The AT&T slider is not a representation of maximum possible data usage.
2) As another poster pointed out, who streams Netflix 24x7 on the least cost-effective plan? $30 for 3GB/month would change the original calculation from $68,376 to $360 per year, the original value of the unlimited plan. (But at 43K minutes/month on either large plan would make it $10,264/year.)
3) Please, for the love, don't use a mobile plan for streaming 24x7. Buying a house with a hard line is a much better investment. $10K/year will pay for a reasonable mortgage, and you get to keep the house afterwards.
That's why my password is "I~Did-It". Then it actually would be self-incrimination to reveal the password.
... nets 350K downloads in 3 days.
As a pro-lifer, I simply believe in the civil liberties of every unborn child.
Please don't assume that the "pro-choice" side is the only side for upholding civil liberties. "Your rights end where my rights begin." It comes down to a difference in opinion about whose rights are more important; I believe the unborn child's right to life is a liberty far more important than the mother's right to a convenient life.
(Not trying to start a flame war. I understand and accept that sometimes, it's about more than just convenience.)