All of the open hardware initiatives seem to have stagnated or thrown in the towel. The Open BIOS people seem to have plugged away right up to the point of putting it on iron, and then stopped short. Opencores.org is down, and I can't find any of their concrete work elsewhere. Am I missing something?
It's ether that or Theo is a refugee from some parallel universe Bizzaro World, where "up yours, scumbags!" is a polite way to open a formal dialogue and "good morning, gentlemen" is a killing insult. One of the two, certainly.
Bags of money actually do make a comfortable enough bed that even the most guilty conscience can get plenty of sleep. After all, it's not about how you sleep at night, but rather where.;)
I think that the idea is for people to vote out of office anyone who causes tortious harms while in office instead of suing the government. It's a choice between voting the person out or suing the government, raising taxes, and still voting him out.
Governments in the English-speaking world generally have sovereign immunity from lawsuits. This is usually grounded in the logic that suing "the government" for money damages is really just stealing from taxpayers. But governments can waive that immunity, and many do. The US has a couple of different statutes to that effect, including the Federal Tort Claims Act (most states have state tort claims acts, as well).
Why not link to TFA? Here is a more direct link to the research. I wonder why we got linked from the summary to another summary. Maybe because the summary is new today but the research is 2 years old.
Anyhow, none of the numbers seem all that surprising, except that 55% of active members are women (63% of all members were men).
No, but if you started a major fast-food chain called MacDonalds, you could still be found to have infringed McDonalds' trademark. There's much more to trademark law than the precise, literal infringement of an exact mark.
Does their trademark apply only to the i? I think not. Apple is not overstepping the bounds of reason by wanting its iPod trademark to preclude the use of "pod" to mean "multimedia."
The problem is that "podcasting" comes directly from the iPod name and confuses a vast majority of consumers. Unlike possibly a pod of whales, here the term actually is confusing and misleading. You would think that Apple would like the public thinking that podcasting is dependent upon (or has anything to do with) iPods, but I think their fear is that the term commoditizes iPods. They don't want iPod to become the next pliers, band-aid, or other generic term that was once a trademarked brand name. Moreover, they don't want people who ask for iPods for Christmas to get their competitors' products.
If you do business in China, you will not just ignore the Chinese court. I don't do business in China, so I would likely ignore it. I get the impression that Spamhaus does some substantial business in the US. The US court in question therefore does have jurisdiction over them, at least to the extent they do business in the US.
If the barking dog is on a leash, your decision whether to ignore it or not should be based in part on how close you are and how long the leash is.
I almost forgot to mention this. You state that the use of the word "distrust" was mine. That word was originally used by the original poster and, to my knowledge, I only used it in direct response to his use.
I thought I was clear. Let me try explaining again. I used examples from the original post not to attack the person who wrote it, but merely as examples of mistakes that are pervasive in high school educated people in the English-speaking nations of the world. Contrast what I wrote with what other people said in response to the same original comment.
Now, contrast your response to me with the others that were posted. Do you notice how other people have engaged in a constructive discussion rather than issuing retorts like "I hope you get modded down."?
As an aside, your point about Slashdot being more like spoken word than formal prose is completely irrelevant to the issues that I pointed out. When you speak, you don't spell out your words. You simply speak them aloud. When you take written speech and write it down, you choose the correct spelling of the words. The fact that they sound the same regardless of spelling in no way makes spelling irrelevant. (The same applies to word usage - "would of" for "would've," for instance.) If you want to say that it's okay to spell poorly on Slashdot when one is not a native speaker of English and thus does not have a high school education built around written English, then I have no problem accepting that (and, not knowing where the original poster was educated, I have given him the benefit of the doubt from the start, contrary to your uninformed, narrow view of the matter). However, trying to argue that a given written medium is akin to spoken word does not make spelling and word choice errors acceptable.
The original argument was that it is categorically a waste of time and unproductive to ask students questions about what they've turned in. The Socratic method involves asking students questions as a means of teaching them. In what way did I mischaracterize the parent's point?
That would hurt me so bad if I were modded down. How about looking outside the context of my response and thinking about the fact that millions of people who are native speakers of the English language make the same mistakes? The fact that I chose those that I listed came from the parent post doesn't in any way make what I said an attack on the person who posted it.
Does your native language not being English give you a particular license to make ad hominem attacks like this?
I hate it when I loose my keys, I know that much. They usually hit someone pretty hard and then the guy gets mad at me.:P (That one is a personal pet peeve. Another one got to me last week but now I can't remember what it was, which is probably a good thing.)
Who said anything about nitpicky? Have all the students write a paper, and then discuss it in class. Is that such a difficult concept to understand in 2006? It wasn't when I was in school.
You absolutely don't have to be an asshole. You just have to be intelligent. I'm sure that you know the difference at least to some extent. As to the blank stare - if you give one student an F for the day for giving you the blank stare, the rest of them suddenly get talkative. Or are you a complete advocate of the 17-year-old daycare method of education?
Slashdot Mirror
'e could grip i' by the 'usk!
That just means he chose to move to Canada. It's no defense. :P
All of the open hardware initiatives seem to have stagnated or thrown in the towel. The Open BIOS people seem to have plugged away right up to the point of putting it on iron, and then stopped short. Opencores.org is down, and I can't find any of their concrete work elsewhere. Am I missing something?
This actually raises a very interesting and valid point: what was the reliability of the 14 Tbps fiber link? How many packets had to be retransmitted?
Ooh, ooh! Me too! Don't mod the parent at all!
Bags of money actually do make a comfortable enough bed that even the most guilty conscience can get plenty of sleep. After all, it's not about how you sleep at night, but rather where. ;)
I think that the idea is for people to vote out of office anyone who causes tortious harms while in office instead of suing the government. It's a choice between voting the person out or suing the government, raising taxes, and still voting him out.
Governments in the English-speaking world generally have sovereign immunity from lawsuits. This is usually grounded in the logic that suing "the government" for money damages is really just stealing from taxpayers. But governments can waive that immunity, and many do. The US has a couple of different statutes to that effect, including the Federal Tort Claims Act (most states have state tort claims acts, as well).
Why not link to TFA? Here is a more direct link to the research. I wonder why we got linked from the summary to another summary. Maybe because the summary is new today but the research is 2 years old.
Anyhow, none of the numbers seem all that surprising, except that 55% of active members are women (63% of all members were men).
No, I'm not. Were they both major fast-food chains operating in the same geographical area?
No, but if you started a major fast-food chain called MacDonalds, you could still be found to have infringed McDonalds' trademark. There's much more to trademark law than the precise, literal infringement of an exact mark.
Does their trademark apply only to the i? I think not. Apple is not overstepping the bounds of reason by wanting its iPod trademark to preclude the use of "pod" to mean "multimedia."
As long as you keep all forms and derivatives of "blog" on the list, I'll agree that "podcast" is one of the most annoying buzzwords in use.
I never said it's timely or likely to work out for them. There was just a little ignorance left in the world to clear up. :)
The problem is that "podcasting" comes directly from the iPod name and confuses a vast majority of consumers. Unlike possibly a pod of whales, here the term actually is confusing and misleading. You would think that Apple would like the public thinking that podcasting is dependent upon (or has anything to do with) iPods, but I think their fear is that the term commoditizes iPods. They don't want iPod to become the next pliers, band-aid, or other generic term that was once a trademarked brand name. Moreover, they don't want people who ask for iPods for Christmas to get their competitors' products.
Good point. Does anyone here own SCO stock and want to file a derivative suit against the board for this ridiculous mess?
If you do business in China, you will not just ignore the Chinese court. I don't do business in China, so I would likely ignore it. I get the impression that Spamhaus does some substantial business in the US. The US court in question therefore does have jurisdiction over them, at least to the extent they do business in the US.
If the barking dog is on a leash, your decision whether to ignore it or not should be based in part on how close you are and how long the leash is.
I almost forgot to mention this. You state that the use of the word "distrust" was mine. That word was originally used by the original poster and, to my knowledge, I only used it in direct response to his use.
I thought I was clear. Let me try explaining again. I used examples from the original post not to attack the person who wrote it, but merely as examples of mistakes that are pervasive in high school educated people in the English-speaking nations of the world. Contrast what I wrote with what other people said in response to the same original comment.
Now, contrast your response to me with the others that were posted. Do you notice how other people have engaged in a constructive discussion rather than issuing retorts like "I hope you get modded down."?
As an aside, your point about Slashdot being more like spoken word than formal prose is completely irrelevant to the issues that I pointed out. When you speak, you don't spell out your words. You simply speak them aloud. When you take written speech and write it down, you choose the correct spelling of the words. The fact that they sound the same regardless of spelling in no way makes spelling irrelevant. (The same applies to word usage - "would of" for "would've," for instance.) If you want to say that it's okay to spell poorly on Slashdot when one is not a native speaker of English and thus does not have a high school education built around written English, then I have no problem accepting that (and, not knowing where the original poster was educated, I have given him the benefit of the doubt from the start, contrary to your uninformed, narrow view of the matter). However, trying to argue that a given written medium is akin to spoken word does not make spelling and word choice errors acceptable.
The original argument was that it is categorically a waste of time and unproductive to ask students questions about what they've turned in. The Socratic method involves asking students questions as a means of teaching them. In what way did I mischaracterize the parent's point?
That would hurt me so bad if I were modded down. How about looking outside the context of my response and thinking about the fact that millions of people who are native speakers of the English language make the same mistakes? The fact that I chose those that I listed came from the parent post doesn't in any way make what I said an attack on the person who posted it.
Does your native language not being English give you a particular license to make ad hominem attacks like this?
I hate it when I loose my keys, I know that much. They usually hit someone pretty hard and then the guy gets mad at me. :P (That one is a personal pet peeve. Another one got to me last week but now I can't remember what it was, which is probably a good thing.)
Who said anything about nitpicky? Have all the students write a paper, and then discuss it in class. Is that such a difficult concept to understand in 2006? It wasn't when I was in school.
You absolutely don't have to be an asshole. You just have to be intelligent. I'm sure that you know the difference at least to some extent. As to the blank stare - if you give one student an F for the day for giving you the blank stare, the rest of them suddenly get talkative. Or are you a complete advocate of the 17-year-old daycare method of education?