Steven Spielberg's office lies at the end long underground tunnel, protected by a series of treacherous and deadly booby traps. The thief narrowly escaped clutching the script, only to find himself lying on the Paramount studio lot surrounded by lawyers threateningly aiming pens at him.
Marcus Brody: "You see... the pen is mightier than the sword!"
I don't think she's an idiot. Her expectations as a judge shouldn't be making a distinction between whether the log is kept in RAM or on the hard disk. It doesn't make a difference-- she considers the logs as evidence. Storing the logs in RAM instead of on disk could be considered an obstruction of justice. Assuming that the retention of and even the practice of logs was considered a legal obligation, that is [this may not be decided, but I can assure you it will at some point].
Let's set up the paper example. For argument's sake, let's say I'm required to keep receipts for all of my purchases. I print all of them out on my laser printer--- but whoops-- the printer's output just routes the paper into the shredder.
"I'm sorry," I say to the judge, "but I just can't give you those receipts, you see, they only existed temporarily. "Oh, yes, ma'am. I did choose to put the shredder there. I just didn't have any room for the paper anywhere else!"
Ah, but you seem to forget how those geeks and hardcore gamers influence the next purchase decision of mere mortals.
Family/Friends/Co-Workers usually have a go-to person who's a geek or hardcore gamer and they usually need a blessing from them before buying. If I don't have a Mac and don't know how to support it, I will tell them "Sure, buy a mac, but don't call me when it hits the fan". Catch my drift?
Please your geeks and people will follow.
That's pretty much the same thing as putting soothing gel on a hemorrhoid. Just as long as you please your asshole, it'll keep doing its job. So, too, that you listen to your asshole geek friend who's too busy being selfish to apply their general knowledge to another system.
Vista's UAC prompt seems a little overly paranoid even for that. Why, for example, do I have go through several prompts when changing the Windows Time setting using MS's own control panel? All I want to do is have it sync up with my other clocks and that doesn't really feel like a security threat.
It is a big deal though. So much custom software relies on the time/date setting. Can you imagine a targeted virus that set back the clock five seconds every hour on, lets say, securities trading systems, to allow backdated transactions?
That's not a real world example since the software is more complex than that, but in many business applications the time/date is crucial to many transactions and calculations. The user may see it as nothing more than the same thing as the calendar on his desk or the clock on the wall, but it has a much wider role.
Is a company not allowed to revise their statement? They are, by and large, stating fact here. The world is complex. An investment for a seemingly righteous cause is an investment in a contradictory cause in another area. Which cause do they choose?
One might say that they have enough money to do both. To invest in all causes and cancel out the 'bad' by fueling all of the good and bad together.
What level of abstraction is a foundation obligated to operate at? The Higher Goal, the Micromanaged Goal, or some blend in-between?
No... He means... "No (as in it won't break all the Macros he's written), macros still work fine (as in... they work)" Get your English straight, and learn to use punctuation... GR
That "wooshing" sound you just heard is that (admittedly rather lame) joke going right over your head. Or perhaps under your feet.
Admittedly, he couldn't have known it was joke unless it had a score of +3-+5 Funny.
The original intention, as I understand it, was that Kylix's cross-platform emphasis was, as Delphi typically was, intended for being able to port your custom, proprietary software in the business sector to Linux. They were hoping that Linux would take a larger role in the business desktop and server market for proprietary applications, and they happened to be wrong.
That's why the price was so high at first-- it wasn't for open source developers, it wasn't for free software developers, it wasn't intended for making little tools and shareware-esque helper applications. It was for writing and porting cross-platform proprietary software, like the majority of businesses were using at that time. The fault lies both with Borland, and with Linux's inability to be ready for the desktop.
I hear this from time to time but I've never heard of a company exercising these alleged "rights" over code written on an employee's own time. In California this is illegal. What states would allow this sort of thing? And more importantly, why?
I've not heard of it ever being exercised, either. The 'legitimate reason' is essentially a non-compete clause: if you work for business X engaged in the practice of Y, and in your off time are developing product Z, which would be in direct competition of practice Y, then you're ostensibly in violation of that. Therefore, the innovations you may be making in your version of their product should belong to them while you're employed by them.
By saying legitimate reason I'm not saying I agree that it's legitimate, just that I can see the argument being made.
agree about the "production code" aspect, but I've asked to see what code someone has done on their own, no matter what it is
And even then, many employers have employment agreements that effectively own the IP you work on, even in your spare time, while you're employed by the company.
If Microsoft started suing folks using its technology then its technology would become much less popular virtually overnight.
This is why Microsoft has wisely chosen a middle road. Instead of actually taking people to court, it is simply going to threaten to take people to court and hope that they'll throw money Microsoft's way.
It seems to be that this might just be what needs to happen to have some of the patent system overthrown. Personally, I say let Microsoft do whatever it thinks it needs to do, and let the war be fought, and lets see what comes of it. If it's mutually-assured global thermonuclear patent war they want, then give it to them. It could very well be that Linux [even in the decentralized ownerlessness sense of it] violates some of Microsoft's patents. What slashdot people seem to think is that it doesn't matter if it does, because perhaps some of Microsoft's code violates other patents. Just because both are violating each other doesn't mean a resolution shouldn't be approached.
The litigation that ensues may very well be that metaphysical push that requires the system to redefine itself. And then we all benefit. It seems like the Linux contingent of slashdotters live in the future-world they envision where none of this matters-- straight innovation, getting the job done, and having their way is all that matters. That's not today. Certain events and decisions need to be made before we get there, and living as if we're already in that world is in no one's best interests.
I wont buy the PS3 since it doesnt have rumble now...
that combined with lack luster launch titles (ridge racer is the best???).
The rumble is that big of a deciding factor? It's an unrealistic shaking! I might go so far as to say that that was one reason I waited on all of the last-gen consoles for so long; it seemed like such a lame annoyance. The other big reason was when they added analog sticks to the controllers, but I digress, I've gotten over that.
I've enjoyed some games that used the rumble effectively, but I can't imagine how that's ever a deal breaker.
Then why don't you use the time when you wouldn't otherwise be getting paid to get the $100 back? Surely you don't make your professional wage 24hrs per day. Your free time is just that. For example, I get paid about $35/hr but I only get paid between the hours of 8AM and 5PM. It's not very accurate for me to assume my free (as in beer) time is worth $35/hr. If I can spend 2 to 3 hours of my free time to get $100, I may just do that.
I don't know about you, but I consider my free time to be worth more than my working time. If I'm making $35/hr for my job, then my off time costs nothing less than double that, because I have less of it. Worse, in typical slashdot fashion, someone up there in the parent considered it the "MS tax" as if you weren't paying for anything you got something out of in the first place. People are so goddamn selfish.
Contrary to that, of course, I'll go ahead and sound selfish: Let's say I work $35 an hour. On my free time I'll call that $70 an hour. But to me, 15 minutes is worth more to me than an hour is. So if someone needed something from me for 15 minutes, I'd probably charge that 15 minutes as $70; otherwise it wasn't worth spending the time on it-- 15 minutes isn't worth $17.50. If someone said, "I'll pay you $18 to deliver this letter for me down the street," I'd turn them down. $18 is nothing, certainly not a reimbursement for spending my free time 'working'.
The funny thing about your question is that in some ways, users are about two clicks from this scenario every time they run Windows XP: from the Start menu, select Set Program Access and Defaults. And it's not limited to the browsers you list, but any browser that they can download.
Ah, but how are you supposed to download another browser on a clean install? By opening Internet Explorer. And by that time, for most users, the choice has already been made.
The part of this that I disagreed with most is: What average user even opens Set Program Access and Defaults? That's not even terminology the average user fully understands. That says absolutely nothing, from a layman's point of view, of what they can find in there.
If that utility plays a vital role in the decisions to be made, then it should be running on the first boot of the system.
I don't remember any licensing agreement with my ex's iPod Mini, nor do I see how one could possibly be enforced - it's hardware, not software.
Technically, it's both. That hardware iPod is running Apple-made iPod software to play back songs. Even before we touch iTunes, you're running software on their handheld single-purpose (well, now multiple-purpose) computer and operating system.
At least then the users will be prepared for what will happen to him/her when they bring their laptop in to have me work on it and I find out they have been surfing porn sites with their virus scanner disabled.
I'm pretty sure they'll just expect you to do your job and fix it, assuming they're paying you.
Run GNU/Linux on cheap/commodity hardware and you will not need any whoring analyst to tell you that you're a tech-savvy person.
Riiight. Because tech-savvy people only work on the cheapest hardware they can find with open-source operating systems. Everyone else is just playing pretend.
Exactly my point. Just because the guy's a slimeball and is accused of (and admitted to, somewhat, but not directly) some henious shit doesn't mean he's given up his rights.
I totally thought he was guilty, as a citizen. But what I thought doesn't mean anything in terms of whether or not he was guilty. Hence the use of "technically." And, likewise, I totally think Foley is guilty here. That doesn't mean a thing.
"Evidence of flight is evidence of guilt." Foley bolted as soon as the story broke on ABC Bews. No one -- not the Speaker of the House --- not Foley's own attorney --- has dared to challenge the authenticity of the IMs.
I definitely agree on the second point, no one has publically [I'm sure they are privately]. And someone (the media) should be. But that issue of protecting the minors also plays a huge role here.
As for the first point, just because it's a saying and is in quotes doesn't make it true. OJ Simpson took flight, but he was technically not guilty.
Slashdot Mirror
That's falling action, not a climax. It ties things up while still hinting that the world continues.
Marcus Brody: "You see... the pen is mightier than the sword!"
Let's set up the paper example. For argument's sake, let's say I'm required to keep receipts for all of my purchases. I print all of them out on my laser printer--- but whoops-- the printer's output just routes the paper into the shredder. "I'm sorry," I say to the judge, "but I just can't give you those receipts, you see, they only existed temporarily. "Oh, yes, ma'am. I did choose to put the shredder there. I just didn't have any room for the paper anywhere else!"
Geeks should learn more responsibility.
That's not a real world example since the software is more complex than that, but in many business applications the time/date is crucial to many transactions and calculations. The user may see it as nothing more than the same thing as the calendar on his desk or the clock on the wall, but it has a much wider role.
One might say that they have enough money to do both. To invest in all causes and cancel out the 'bad' by fueling all of the good and bad together.
What level of abstraction is a foundation obligated to operate at? The Higher Goal, the Micromanaged Goal, or some blend in-between?
Admittedly, he couldn't have known it was joke unless it had a score of +3-+5 Funny.
That's why the price was so high at first-- it wasn't for open source developers, it wasn't for free software developers, it wasn't intended for making little tools and shareware-esque helper applications. It was for writing and porting cross-platform proprietary software, like the majority of businesses were using at that time. The fault lies both with Borland, and with Linux's inability to be ready for the desktop.
By saying legitimate reason I'm not saying I agree that it's legitimate, just that I can see the argument being made.
The litigation that ensues may very well be that metaphysical push that requires the system to redefine itself. And then we all benefit. It seems like the Linux contingent of slashdotters live in the future-world they envision where none of this matters-- straight innovation, getting the job done, and having their way is all that matters. That's not today. Certain events and decisions need to be made before we get there, and living as if we're already in that world is in no one's best interests.
I've enjoyed some games that used the rumble effectively, but I can't imagine how that's ever a deal breaker.
And yeah, I'll posture if it gets a point across.
Contrary to that, of course, I'll go ahead and sound selfish: Let's say I work $35 an hour. On my free time I'll call that $70 an hour. But to me, 15 minutes is worth more to me than an hour is. So if someone needed something from me for 15 minutes, I'd probably charge that 15 minutes as $70; otherwise it wasn't worth spending the time on it-- 15 minutes isn't worth $17.50. If someone said, "I'll pay you $18 to deliver this letter for me down the street," I'd turn them down. $18 is nothing, certainly not a reimbursement for spending my free time 'working'.
The part of this that I disagreed with most is: What average user even opens Set Program Access and Defaults? That's not even terminology the average user fully understands. That says absolutely nothing, from a layman's point of view, of what they can find in there.
If that utility plays a vital role in the decisions to be made, then it should be running on the first boot of the system.
You don't have to actively participate or subscribe to the philosophical implications of the game for them to be valid.
Yeah, but Beowulf's mother might rip the researcher's arms off.
Riiight. Because tech-savvy people only work on the cheapest hardware they can find with open-source operating systems. Everyone else is just playing pretend.
Exactly my point. Just because the guy's a slimeball and is accused of (and admitted to, somewhat, but not directly) some henious shit doesn't mean he's given up his rights.
I totally thought he was guilty, as a citizen. But what I thought doesn't mean anything in terms of whether or not he was guilty. Hence the use of "technically." And, likewise, I totally think Foley is guilty here. That doesn't mean a thing.
Show me the textual admission. Has he been booked in criminal court yet? Even if you're pleading guilty there's still a process to go through.
I definitely agree on the second point, no one has publically [I'm sure they are privately]. And someone (the media) should be. But that issue of protecting the minors also plays a huge role here.
As for the first point, just because it's a saying and is in quotes doesn't make it true. OJ Simpson took flight, but he was technically not guilty.