The steering isn't quite as good as the old Protege
I own a 2002 mid-year Protege5, and it is indeed an amazingly fun car to drive, even in automatic. Very go-kart feel, handles like a $40K car. Mazda (perhaps rightly) decided the P5's strongly sport-tuned suspension was too rough on the butts of the typical car-buyer, and made the 3 much more cushy at the price of handling.:-( Right decision I guess, but it's sad to see zoom-zoom fall by the wayside.
How bad is the 3's gas mileage?
And now back to topic: The USB car has a 3-"cylinder". Did they make a mistake -- how do you do 3 cylinder pistons? Or is this actually a rotary?
AllofMP3's purported distribution rights stem from a license it claims it received from the murky "Russian Multimedia and Internet Society" or ROMS. There are actually several online sites which have claimed a license from this "Society" as well. ROMS's rights come from recent bill bill in Rusaia called the "Law of Russian Fderation on Copyright and Neighboring Rights". Section IV ("Collective Management of property rights") details the construction of "Societies" set up by groups of copyright holders specificially to manage the distribution of works by those copyright holders.
ROMS was set up by just a few Russian copyright holders, but rather than managing them, it now dubiously claims that, contrary to my reading of the statute, (I Am Not A Russian Lawyer: IANARL) it now has the rights for all copyright holders period. But even if they can make claim to all music, there's an "opt-out" clause which totally destroys their claim:
2. The owners of copyrights and neighboring rights who have not assigned powers to the organization with respect to the collection of royalties, as specified in Clause 4 of Article 46 of the present Act, shall be entitled to claim payment by the organization of the royalties due to them, according to the apportionment, and also to exclude their works and objects of neighboring rights from licenses issued to users by this organization.
The organization which has issued that opt-out to ROMS is the International Federation of Phonograhic Industries (IFPI), which represents legitimate worldwide rights-holders. As such, IFPI bluntly states that AllofMP3 has received no license to distribute music in Russia or internationally. Neither! Here's the press release.
Now here's the crucial item. IFPI lost their lawsuit against ROMS in Russia, but not for the reason you think. The Russian government did not claim that ROMS had any rights at all -- because they don't -- but instead claimed that the problem stems from a total lack of digital distribution laws in Russia at all. Russia thinks its copyright laws only apply to analog.
That may be fine, but it completely deligitimizes any claims of US buyers of AllofMP3's crap. Because the US does have such laws, and people purchasing from AllofMP3 are doing so illegally in violation of IFPI's rights. Imagine if someone set up a space station on Mars, with no laws at all, and started distributing illegal CDs. It doesn't matter if Mars has no laws: the US does, and purchase of thse CDs is illegal.
Personally I will be sticking with AllofMP3 (what ITunes should be - pay per mb and the ability to choose from a wide range of formats/bitrates) or failing that, P2P.
Me too! I mean, why make legitimate copies of music at a low cost when I can make illegal ones at an even lower one?
Mixins? I thought we were talking about security here. In every language I know with mixins (various dynamic languages, Objective-C), they're a major security risk. Objective-C's Categories in particular are a phenominally bad security problem.
No touch screen.
The PSP is too expensive a device for the huge majority of the handheld game market (kids under 12). And it's a poor substitute for a portable DVD player (heck, Sony itself makes a portable 7" DVD player for $300-400 -- the DVP-FX701 -- which kicks the PSP's butt). But the device could have been a *phenominal* PDA. A movie-playing, game-playing PDA with a wonderful screen. But without a touch screen, it's just Gameboy fodder.
I am under the impression that NeXT's method for supporting multipe architectures with one.app was to have a binary for each different archtecture stored in a separate subdirectory within the.app. Was this not the case?
It is not the case. NeXT's "app wrappers" stored subdirectories of resources, and within resources there were further subdirectories (.lproj) for different languages. But the executable proper was a single file in Mach-O format which contained multiple architecture binaries. Likewise for the various loadable bundles' object files.
Correction. While NeXT had fat binaries, they were of course restricted to the operating system and file system. So while you could have an app bundle that ran NeXTSTEP on Black 68K hardware, PCs, Suns, and HP's, it couldn't also have OpenStep for Win32.
So far as I know, the only iChat client which will work with Google Talk is iChat for Tiger. If you don't have Tiger, you're out of luck -- time to get another program.
The Olympic Committee holds a number of trademarks (as you might imagine) and has gone after organizations using the phrase "Olympics", with more or less success. For example, the well-respected "Olympics of the Mind" (OM) high-school creativity contest was required to change to "Odyssey of the Mind" about ten years ago. To my knowledge, the Olympic Committee has only given one organization permission to retain the term: The Special Olympics.
You cannot apply for a patent on any thing that is already in the public domain
You absolutely can. The patent office is not interested in whether or not someone else is using your idea publically. All that matters is if you can prove that you had the idea first. And after your idea becomes public (by you or someone else), the clock is ticking for you to file a patent.
You show that you had the idea first in one of several ways One is to publish the idea before anyone else. Another is to file a provisional patent.
As Apple was using the idea before Microsoft even patented it, Microsoft's patent will probably be thrown out unless MS can prove that they had the idea prior to Apple. Which I think they probably will not be able to do. But Apple also applied for a patent which they will not now get because the clock has run out.
Functional programming greatly simplifies the task of the programmer by removing execution order from the things that programmers have to keep track of.
This is another way of saying "functional programming languages don't allow local variables". Functional language proponents are divided into two camps. First, there are the functionalists: the people who want functional programming languages to be useful as tools. They tout the simplicity of the languages but acknowledge the fact that even the fastest of them (like OCaml) can only compete with fast traditional languages speedwise if you write your code in a more or less traditional way (which is very painful to do in a functional language, and in some, impossible). These people are willing to accept a bastardized functional language if it means one which can get work done.
Then their are the zealots:
Historically functional programming has had problems doing IO: languages have had to admit impure side effects to do IO.
If it doesn't make falsifiable predictions, it isn't science.
Much as I find ID abhorrent, the above statement is dead wrong.
Science is the application of the scientific method, a cycle of examination, hypothesis, and testing. Falsifiable experiment isn't a necessary or sufficient condition for science.
The reason is that experiments are essentially never fully falsifying. In the natural world, one cannot take into consideration every possible variable, and so there's always an out. But there are degrees of falsifiability, and these degrees dictate the "softness" of the science. Physics and Chemistry permit control of enough variables as to make experiments highly persuasive on the falsifiable front. On the other extreme, economics and other social sciences (and to a lesser extent biology) deal with dynamics so complex and variables so numerous that it is extraordinarily difficult to construct experiments which even have the hint of falsifyableness. The best one can do is pile up evidence in support of the hypothesis as opposed to against it. This isn't due to laziness: it's just the nature of the problem. Generally speaking, soft sciences are further out on the un-falsifiable scale than hard sciences. Or as someone once put it, "God gave the physicists all the easy problems".
The problem with ID isn't that it's not falsifiable: it's that there's no way to construct a persuasive experiment for ID if the designer is assumed to be omnipotent. In this case, the number of variables is infinite.
I sat there watching a 4 year Mac veteran trying to use the menus with their stupid ass mouse and they missed like every other click. It's designed to fail.
Doubtful. I've never had a problem with dragging through large menus on the Mac Mouse.
"4-year veteran", sheesh. I'm a 25-year veteran. Here's a nickel, kid.
I think the grandparent is partly right, and jcr (and Felton) is partly wrong. Hollywood may be settling on Intel's DRM scheme, and Apple wants to make sure it doesn't get left in the cold. That is undoubtedly a major factor in the switch.
Slashdot Mirror
How bad is the 3's gas mileage?
And now back to topic: The USB car has a 3-"cylinder". Did they make a mistake -- how do you do 3 cylinder pistons? Or is this actually a rotary?
ROMS was set up by just a few Russian copyright holders, but rather than managing them, it now dubiously claims that, contrary to my reading of the statute, (I Am Not A Russian Lawyer: IANARL) it now has the rights for all copyright holders period. But even if they can make claim to all music, there's an "opt-out" clause which totally destroys their claim:
The organization which has issued that opt-out to ROMS is the International Federation of Phonograhic Industries (IFPI), which represents legitimate worldwide rights-holders. As such, IFPI bluntly states that AllofMP3 has received no license to distribute music in Russia or internationally. Neither! Here's the press release.
Now here's the crucial item. IFPI lost their lawsuit against ROMS in Russia, but not for the reason you think. The Russian government did not claim that ROMS had any rights at all -- because they don't -- but instead claimed that the problem stems from a total lack of digital distribution laws in Russia at all. Russia thinks its copyright laws only apply to analog.
That may be fine, but it completely deligitimizes any claims of US buyers of AllofMP3's crap. Because the US does have such laws, and people purchasing from AllofMP3 are doing so illegally in violation of IFPI's rights. Imagine if someone set up a space station on Mars, with no laws at all, and started distributing illegal CDs. It doesn't matter if Mars has no laws: the US does, and purchase of thse CDs is illegal.
Mixins? I thought we were talking about security here. In every language I know with mixins (various dynamic languages, Objective-C), they're a major security risk. Objective-C's Categories in particular are a phenominally bad security problem.
No touch screen. The PSP is too expensive a device for the huge majority of the handheld game market (kids under 12). And it's a poor substitute for a portable DVD player (heck, Sony itself makes a portable 7" DVD player for $300-400 -- the DVP-FX701 -- which kicks the PSP's butt). But the device could have been a *phenominal* PDA. A movie-playing, game-playing PDA with a wonderful screen. But without a touch screen, it's just Gameboy fodder.
Correction. While NeXT had fat binaries, they were of course restricted to the operating system and file system. So while you could have an app bundle that ran NeXTSTEP on Black 68K hardware, PCs, Suns, and HP's, it couldn't also have OpenStep for Win32.
So far as I know, the only iChat client which will work with Google Talk is iChat for Tiger. If you don't have Tiger, you're out of luck -- time to get another program.
And that, my friends, is why Apple went with Intel rather than AMD. Low power consumption. Apple's market is largely in the small and portable.
The Olympic Committee holds a number of trademarks (as you might imagine) and has gone after organizations using the phrase "Olympics", with more or less success. For example, the well-respected "Olympics of the Mind" (OM) high-school creativity contest was required to change to "Odyssey of the Mind" about ten years ago. To my knowledge, the Olympic Committee has only given one organization permission to retain the term: The Special Olympics.
You show that you had the idea first in one of several ways One is to publish the idea before anyone else. Another is to file a provisional patent.
As Apple was using the idea before Microsoft even patented it, Microsoft's patent will probably be thrown out unless MS can prove that they had the idea prior to Apple. Which I think they probably will not be able to do. But Apple also applied for a patent which they will not now get because the clock has run out.
As of this posting, Lloyd's is down hard. Slashdotted perhaps?
Then their are the zealots:
Need I say more?Fahrenheit 9/11 grossed $120 million at t the box office alone.
Science is the application of the scientific method, a cycle of examination, hypothesis, and testing. Falsifiable experiment isn't a necessary or sufficient condition for science.
The reason is that experiments are essentially never fully falsifying. In the natural world, one cannot take into consideration every possible variable, and so there's always an out. But there are degrees of falsifiability, and these degrees dictate the "softness" of the science. Physics and Chemistry permit control of enough variables as to make experiments highly persuasive on the falsifiable front. On the other extreme, economics and other social sciences (and to a lesser extent biology) deal with dynamics so complex and variables so numerous that it is extraordinarily difficult to construct experiments which even have the hint of falsifyableness. The best one can do is pile up evidence in support of the hypothesis as opposed to against it. This isn't due to laziness: it's just the nature of the problem. Generally speaking, soft sciences are further out on the un-falsifiable scale than hard sciences. Or as someone once put it, "God gave the physicists all the easy problems".
The problem with ID isn't that it's not falsifiable: it's that there's no way to construct a persuasive experiment for ID if the designer is assumed to be omnipotent. In this case, the number of variables is infinite.
"4-year veteran", sheesh. I'm a 25-year veteran. Here's a nickel, kid.
I think the grandparent is partly right, and jcr (and Felton) is partly wrong. Hollywood may be settling on Intel's DRM scheme, and Apple wants to make sure it doesn't get left in the cold. That is undoubtedly a major factor in the switch.