...but from an Ubuntu scheduling perspective this sounds like good news. The last thing Ubuntu needs for its next LTS release (10.04) is a big new jump to GNOME 3. It'll be nice to have an LTS that will let less bleeding-edge users wait until GNOME 3 has a year and a half of polish, integration, and (most importantly) actual user feedback to upgrade, while still retaining full support
Plus, it'll be just plain interesting to see how Mark Shuttleworth reacts to this frankly rather iffy-looking overhaul. (Oh well, so much for not commenting about it.) Although let's be nice - the screenshots in the link seem to be design mockups, while in the actual screencasts they seem to have solved the billions-of-elipses problem.
Have you gone into a cell phone shop lately? The trend seems to be either a small phone with no new features newer than 2005, or a monstrous internet-touchscreen-camera-keyboard.... thing that sits uneasily in the pocket. The iPhone is a beautiful and useable (but still very big) example. (Odd side note - women seem to get the big ones more often than men, by dint of having handbags to stick giant cell phones into instead of pockets)
Your content or mine might not be that important, but I can guarantee that there are some museums and academic libraries out there that want to archive their materials digitally over long periods.
But yet if you Google "EC" the first two results are the European Commission's home page and its Wikipedia article. Which isn't surprising, for the body that governs the world's largest economy.
Because the thread you responded to discussed the question of "what is open source" in reference to violations of the GPL. I assumed that in asking that question of who gets to define the term Open Source you were asking who gets to define the requirements regarding making your modifications to GPLed code be themselves open source.
If I was wrong in assuming that, I'm very sorry I wasted your time and mine. If you were asking in the narrow sense about who gets to define the term Open Source, I would reply that the question is both irrelevant to this case - since the GPLv2 does not anywhere in its text refer to the term Open Source, and only refers to Richard Stallman's preferred term (Free Software) in the nonbinding preamble - and bearing of multiple answers. The most "official", insofar as any non-legal terminology is official, is that of the Open Source Initiative, which I don't really care to look up (if you'd like to, their web site is here)
Any distributor gets the right to redistribute GPLed code under the terms of that same license, which the courts of the Federal Government and the various states (under authority granted them under laws passed in Congress by Constitutional procedures) are obliged to enforce. This particular license's terms requires Microsoft (assuming, as seems likely but not certain, that they copied the ImageMaster code) to do certain things when they distribute their version
Namely, if the.NET Common Interface Language executable distributed by Microsoft is considered "object or executable form" (in the language of the GPL), then Microsoft is required to "Accompany it with the complete corresponding machine-readable source code" with all of their modifications, which must themselves be released under the GPL license, or include an offer to request such source code from Microsoft. If (against all legal precedent) you consider the CIL to be a modified copy of the original GPL-licensed C# program released by the ImageMaster project, then the requirements are even more stringent - the file itself must be released under the GPL (and not under whatever EULA they did in fact include) and must include a) notices indicating exactly which files were changed from the original; and b) a notice indicating its GPL status. None of which Microsoft has done
No, only the FSF (which wrote the GPL under which the ImageMaster code was released) can make the definitions here. And their intention on writing the license, and ImageMaster's intention on using it, were very clear.
Except... he didn't name all the local variables (they're named, in his decompiled version, things like "num" and "index", based on their syntactic use in the decompiled version). It's just that these variables happen to correspond exactly in their use and assignments to things like numPartitionMaps and position in the ImageMaster source.
The method and class names, on the other hand, are actually present in the binary file (usually as symbols used for linking as a shared library or, in object-oriented languages like Java and C++, used at run-time to figure out things like inheritance. And (oh great coincidence) they match up character-for-character. And let's not even get into the fact that in structure of the classes and methods (at what position in the code calls are made to static methods of external classes, which of these external classes are the same as each other, at what points methods are called on specific variables, etc.) these two code snippets match up exactly.
The event lasted 2.2 seconds - we don't know *when* in the event these particular two photons were released. They could have been released simultaneously, or they could have been released 2.2 seconds apart, or anything in between. This doesn't prove that the photons traveled at exactly the same speed, it just disproves theories that would indicate a speed difference of more than (.9 seconds)/(7.3 billion years) - which I presume they do.
I always think of it with different variables: the X is the amount you could actually do, and the Y is how much you needed to learn in order to do it. So, a shallow learning curve means you can do rather a lot with relatively little learning, a steep learning curve meant you need to learn a lot per unit of functionality, and a learning cliff means you need to learn everything before you can do anything.
It's their loss because Hulu's ability to charge advertisers for spots is a direct function of the number of viewers they have. Less viewers, less ad revenue - that's a pretty clear loss. The only question is whether that loss is offset by the revenue from new fees. Anyone have guesstimates for the numbers there?
Just listened to the NPR interview with one of the researchers - turns out this is just a method demonstration. The method itself lets them activate *any* class of neurons (with sufficiently distinct markers). They went so far as to turn on (oh Lord, forgive me for my puns) male courtship behaviors in male flies - and, strangely enough, in female flies too. The memory-inducing one is just the flashiest, and the one that will probably lead to the most new fundamental knowledge about brain function.
You assume two redundant communication points: One on mars, and one in L4/5.
But the point is to use only one between Earth and Mars.
Actually, I don't see that mentioned anywhere as the point - the point is to reduce communication time from Mars to Earth in the worst case of occlusion by the Sun. Having only one communication point is pretty impractical (any such relay satellite, no matter what its orbit, would, if orbiting the Sun or any body orbiting the sun, have to be occluded at least once a year unless it leaves the plane of the ecliptic, which would be a pain)
Except that R is not (quite) zero; the graphs of resistance against temperature, magnetic field, etc. shows a sharp drop to negligible values at critical temperature, magnetic field, etc., but negligible != 0.
Except that (guess what?) when men are the ones who are outside of the "culture of approval and acceptance," they have just the same problems. (cf. racism, homophobia, etc., and the very substantial effect they have/had of driving the affected people out of certain fields even without any legal or formal discrimination.) The problem here isn't that women have a need for approval and acceptance - that's a characteristic of the vast majority of humanity. We might not all get that from our workplace or the online environment, but it needs to come from somewhere.
True in the narrow technical sense (except for Canada not being a full member). But the fact is that when the EU wants to put up its own version of GPS, they go to the ESA; it's become the fashion for EU states with not the slightest interest in space exploration (like Cyprus) or even EU hopefuls like Turkey and Ukraine - but Canada aside, it's essentially part of the EU/EFTA bloc
Back to the parent-to-whatever-degree, there is a cultural/political definition of "European" not exactly overlapping with geographical Europe, and somewhat broader than the legal definition of the EU (for example, including Switzerland, Norway, and the states of former Yugoslavia). It is this (frankly rather fuzzy) definition that is referred to in the EU founding documents as a criterion for membership (Morocco was rejected on those grounds, Turkey, Georgia, Armenia, and Azerbaijan are debatably within the definition regardless of being mostly in Asia.) And there is a certain tendency to construct this identity in opposition to the Russian/Eastern identity. So by these purely arbitrary, subjective considerations - yes, this guy is the first European commander of the ISS. By some definition of European.
Did you read the post you're replying to? The issue isn't how many people are "actively looking" - it's how many possible addresses they need to guess among before they find your hosts. In IPv6, each subnet is assigned an address space of 64 bits - twice as long as a complete IPv4 address, with as many possible unique addresses as all of IPv4 worldwide - squared.
For example, let's take some random small-medium business. They buy a/24 address space. Some random cracker tries to find an open port on one of their machines by trying to connect to every possible port on every possible address - 254 possible addresses times 65535 possible ports is a manageable number of connections to try. In an equivalent IPv6-addresses subnet the number of possible addresses they need to try goes from (say) 255 for a subnet with a/24 in IPv4, to 2^64 (= somewhere in the neighborhood of 16 followed by eighteen zeros). This is a ridiculously large number of connections to try and open, even for a good-sized botnet (remember - connection setup takes more time than just doing some computation locally). Trying to scan this small-business subnet for machines with open ports would take the kind of resources people usually use to crash the internet services of small countries.
Also, the strong social programs (medical care, pensions, etc) reduce the need to have kids as economic "insurance", so they're actually a liability in terms of costs to feed, clothe, school, free time, social calender, etc.
No, they don't reduce the need, or eliminate it; they collectivize it. For a family that has 5 kids, half to three-quarters of the Social Security taxes of those children will go to supporting some other retirees who had only one child, or none. Which is why people have been freaking out about the cost of retiree's benefits in Japan, if you haven't noticed. Little thing called the http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dependency_ratio>Dependency Ratio. With this, incentives have also become collectivized, in the form of child tax credits and more direct subsidies in Japan and parts of Europe.
Computerized labor can remove that restraint, pushing all of us into either becoming rich people ourselves, or going on welfare (and yes, there will be welfare - robots will not end the one-man one-vote system, or the vague approximation thereof that we use in the States)
The only reason YNetNews decided to report on it at all was that the researchers were Jewish. If it were a Jewish American paper like, say, the Jewish Journal writing this report (and they do occasionally report on things like this), then it would be very clear why they specify "Jewish-American" - otherwise there's little reason for the paper to report on it. Similarly, Yediot Aharonot is an Israeli paper catering either to an Israeli audience (in its Hebrew edition) or a foreign Jewish audience (in its English edition). Given that I can't even *find* this story in the Hebrew edition, I assume the story is exclusively aimed at a foreign Jewish audience (of whom probably 80-90% are American), and they're going to YNetNews to hear (a) news from Israel, and (b) news about Jews. Hence also the emphasis on the impact on Israel, when the researchers are many thousands of miles away and are probably not thinking of Israel's defense as the first application for this drug.
You have a problem with news written from an ethnic/national perspective, go read the New York Times.
I can see a lot of boys getting confused and thinking they've fallen in love with their best friend.
And if a boy and a girl are best friends? Same problem, even if they know nothing about same-sex relationships.
(BIG issue for me in high school, let me tell you.)
Slashdot Mirror
Just because they're a nut job cult doesn't mean they're automatically guilty of every offense they're accused of.
Oooooooooh - will Linux run on that?
On the other hand, the only anime that poster actually mentioned was Neon Genesis Evangelion - popular, but not exactly mainstream.
It's not a paywall, just a user registration wall.
...but from an Ubuntu scheduling perspective this sounds like good news. The last thing Ubuntu needs for its next LTS release (10.04) is a big new jump to GNOME 3. It'll be nice to have an LTS that will let less bleeding-edge users wait until GNOME 3 has a year and a half of polish, integration, and (most importantly) actual user feedback to upgrade, while still retaining full support
Plus, it'll be just plain interesting to see how Mark Shuttleworth reacts to this frankly rather iffy-looking overhaul. (Oh well, so much for not commenting about it.) Although let's be nice - the screenshots in the link seem to be design mockups, while in the actual screencasts they seem to have solved the billions-of-elipses problem.
Have you gone into a cell phone shop lately? The trend seems to be either a small phone with no new features newer than 2005, or a monstrous internet-touchscreen-camera-keyboard.... thing that sits uneasily in the pocket. The iPhone is a beautiful and useable (but still very big) example. (Odd side note - women seem to get the big ones more often than men, by dint of having handbags to stick giant cell phones into instead of pockets)
Your content or mine might not be that important, but I can guarantee that there are some museums and academic libraries out there that want to archive their materials digitally over long periods.
You can (and often do) get monopolies through purely voluntary transactions, without any government intervention.
But yet if you Google "EC" the first two results are the European Commission's home page and its Wikipedia article. Which isn't surprising, for the body that governs the world's largest economy.
Because the thread you responded to discussed the question of "what is open source" in reference to violations of the GPL. I assumed that in asking that question of who gets to define the term Open Source you were asking who gets to define the requirements regarding making your modifications to GPLed code be themselves open source.
If I was wrong in assuming that, I'm very sorry I wasted your time and mine. If you were asking in the narrow sense about who gets to define the term Open Source, I would reply that the question is both irrelevant to this case - since the GPLv2 does not anywhere in its text refer to the term Open Source, and only refers to Richard Stallman's preferred term (Free Software) in the nonbinding preamble - and bearing of multiple answers. The most "official", insofar as any non-legal terminology is official, is that of the Open Source Initiative, which I don't really care to look up (if you'd like to, their web site is here)
Any distributor gets the right to redistribute GPLed code under the terms of that same license, which the courts of the Federal Government and the various states (under authority granted them under laws passed in Congress by Constitutional procedures) are obliged to enforce. This particular license's terms requires Microsoft (assuming, as seems likely but not certain, that they copied the ImageMaster code) to do certain things when they distribute their version
Namely, if the .NET Common Interface Language executable distributed by Microsoft is considered "object or executable form" (in the language of the GPL), then Microsoft is required to "Accompany it with the complete corresponding machine-readable source code" with all of their modifications, which must themselves be released under the GPL license, or include an offer to request such source code from Microsoft. If (against all legal precedent) you consider the CIL to be a modified copy of the original GPL-licensed C# program released by the ImageMaster project, then the requirements are even more stringent - the file itself must be released under the GPL (and not under whatever EULA they did in fact include) and must include a) notices indicating exactly which files were changed from the original; and b) a notice indicating its GPL status. None of which Microsoft has done
No, only the FSF (which wrote the GPL under which the ImageMaster code was released) can make the definitions here. And their intention on writing the license, and ImageMaster's intention on using it, were very clear.
Except... he didn't name all the local variables (they're named, in his decompiled version, things like "num" and "index", based on their syntactic use in the decompiled version). It's just that these variables happen to correspond exactly in their use and assignments to things like numPartitionMaps and position in the ImageMaster source.
The method and class names, on the other hand, are actually present in the binary file (usually as symbols used for linking as a shared library or, in object-oriented languages like Java and C++, used at run-time to figure out things like inheritance. And (oh great coincidence) they match up character-for-character. And let's not even get into the fact that in structure of the classes and methods (at what position in the code calls are made to static methods of external classes, which of these external classes are the same as each other, at what points methods are called on specific variables, etc.) these two code snippets match up exactly.
The event lasted 2.2 seconds - we don't know *when* in the event these particular two photons were released. They could have been released simultaneously, or they could have been released 2.2 seconds apart, or anything in between. This doesn't prove that the photons traveled at exactly the same speed, it just disproves theories that would indicate a speed difference of more than (.9 seconds)/(7.3 billion years) - which I presume they do.
I always think of it with different variables: the X is the amount you could actually do, and the Y is how much you needed to learn in order to do it. So, a shallow learning curve means you can do rather a lot with relatively little learning, a steep learning curve meant you need to learn a lot per unit of functionality, and a learning cliff means you need to learn everything before you can do anything.
How is your decision to break the law their loss?
It's their loss because Hulu's ability to charge advertisers for spots is a direct function of the number of viewers they have. Less viewers, less ad revenue - that's a pretty clear loss. The only question is whether that loss is offset by the revenue from new fees. Anyone have guesstimates for the numbers there?
Just listened to the NPR interview with one of the researchers - turns out this is just a method demonstration. The method itself lets them activate *any* class of neurons (with sufficiently distinct markers). They went so far as to turn on (oh Lord, forgive me for my puns) male courtship behaviors in male flies - and, strangely enough, in female flies too. The memory-inducing one is just the flashiest, and the one that will probably lead to the most new fundamental knowledge about brain function.
You assume two redundant communication points: One on mars, and one in L4/5.
But the point is to use only one between Earth and Mars.
Actually, I don't see that mentioned anywhere as the point - the point is to reduce communication time from Mars to Earth in the worst case of occlusion by the Sun. Having only one communication point is pretty impractical (any such relay satellite, no matter what its orbit, would, if orbiting the Sun or any body orbiting the sun, have to be occluded at least once a year unless it leaves the plane of the ecliptic, which would be a pain)
Except that R is not (quite) zero; the graphs of resistance against temperature, magnetic field, etc. shows a sharp drop to negligible values at critical temperature, magnetic field, etc., but negligible != 0.
Except that (guess what?) when men are the ones who are outside of the "culture of approval and acceptance," they have just the same problems. (cf. racism, homophobia, etc., and the very substantial effect they have/had of driving the affected people out of certain fields even without any legal or formal discrimination.) The problem here isn't that women have a need for approval and acceptance - that's a characteristic of the vast majority of humanity. We might not all get that from our workplace or the online environment, but it needs to come from somewhere.
True in the narrow technical sense (except for Canada not being a full member). But the fact is that when the EU wants to put up its own version of GPS, they go to the ESA; it's become the fashion for EU states with not the slightest interest in space exploration (like Cyprus) or even EU hopefuls like Turkey and Ukraine - but Canada aside, it's essentially part of the EU/EFTA bloc
Back to the parent-to-whatever-degree, there is a cultural/political definition of "European" not exactly overlapping with geographical Europe, and somewhat broader than the legal definition of the EU (for example, including Switzerland, Norway, and the states of former Yugoslavia). It is this (frankly rather fuzzy) definition that is referred to in the EU founding documents as a criterion for membership (Morocco was rejected on those grounds, Turkey, Georgia, Armenia, and Azerbaijan are debatably within the definition regardless of being mostly in Asia.) And there is a certain tendency to construct this identity in opposition to the Russian/Eastern identity. So by these purely arbitrary, subjective considerations - yes, this guy is the first European commander of the ISS. By some definition of European.
Did you read the post you're replying to? The issue isn't how many people are "actively looking" - it's how many possible addresses they need to guess among before they find your hosts. In IPv6, each subnet is assigned an address space of 64 bits - twice as long as a complete IPv4 address, with as many possible unique addresses as all of IPv4 worldwide - squared.
For example, let's take some random small-medium business. They buy a /24 address space. Some random cracker tries to find an open port on one of their machines by trying to connect to every possible port on every possible address - 254 possible addresses times 65535 possible ports is a manageable number of connections to try. In an equivalent IPv6-addresses subnet the number of possible addresses they need to try goes from (say) 255 for a subnet with a /24 in IPv4, to 2^64 (= somewhere in the neighborhood of 16 followed by eighteen zeros). This is a ridiculously large number of connections to try and open, even for a good-sized botnet (remember - connection setup takes more time than just doing some computation locally). Trying to scan this small-business subnet for machines with open ports would take the kind of resources people usually use to crash the internet services of small countries.
Also, the strong social programs (medical care, pensions, etc) reduce the need to have kids as economic "insurance", so they're actually a liability in terms of costs to feed, clothe, school, free time, social calender, etc.
No, they don't reduce the need, or eliminate it; they collectivize it. For a family that has 5 kids, half to three-quarters of the Social Security taxes of those children will go to supporting some other retirees who had only one child, or none. Which is why people have been freaking out about the cost of retiree's benefits in Japan, if you haven't noticed. Little thing called the http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dependency_ratio>Dependency Ratio. With this, incentives have also become collectivized, in the form of child tax credits and more direct subsidies in Japan and parts of Europe. Computerized labor can remove that restraint, pushing all of us into either becoming rich people ourselves, or going on welfare (and yes, there will be welfare - robots will not end the one-man one-vote system, or the vague approximation thereof that we use in the States)
The only reason YNetNews decided to report on it at all was that the researchers were Jewish. If it were a Jewish American paper like, say, the Jewish Journal writing this report (and they do occasionally report on things like this), then it would be very clear why they specify "Jewish-American" - otherwise there's little reason for the paper to report on it. Similarly, Yediot Aharonot is an Israeli paper catering either to an Israeli audience (in its Hebrew edition) or a foreign Jewish audience (in its English edition). Given that I can't even *find* this story in the Hebrew edition, I assume the story is exclusively aimed at a foreign Jewish audience (of whom probably 80-90% are American), and they're going to YNetNews to hear (a) news from Israel, and (b) news about Jews. Hence also the emphasis on the impact on Israel, when the researchers are many thousands of miles away and are probably not thinking of Israel's defense as the first application for this drug. You have a problem with news written from an ethnic/national perspective, go read the New York Times.
I can see a lot of boys getting confused and thinking they've fallen in love with their best friend.
And if a boy and a girl are best friends? Same problem, even if they know nothing about same-sex relationships. (BIG issue for me in high school, let me tell you.)