And every single day without software patents is a huge victory, don't EVER forget that!
If everyone says something cannot be done, it will never happen. If there is hope for something, it is worth fighting for.
Re:What about security?
on
PHP 5 Recipes
·
· Score: 1
The answer is quite simple: let everyone use the docs at php.net and think for themselves. An experienced computer user (all other beings shouldn't program anyway, not even in a scripting language like PHP) will realize the security consequences involved.
This might sound elite, but this is how I did. I used a book to learn the basics of SQL and I'm now teaching myself to use other ways to get rid of the security and efficiency issues I keep programming in MySQL-routines because of that dreaded book. I learned PHP using just the docs on php.net and I'm quite confident that I'm both efficient and secure in all my PHP-routines.
(all my boss ever wanted is that I would comment my scripts to 'easily replace' me 'when necessary'. I still don't quite get it;-) )
If companies like Microsoft can change an official U.N. paper so easily, there is no way ordinary (non-geek) people will even know about Open Source alternatives. And everything that is propagated as "free" (either as in speech or as in beer) is considered "dangerous" (like: "there is no way software can be free, it MUST contain spyware or some other malicious threat. Microsoft says so!")
Really, I hear these things every damned day. I have a really hard time telling people that installing Win XP instead of Win 2k on their PII-233 is NOT making their PC run faster, so no one on earth is going to convince these people to use or trust OSS (unless you can teach them the difference between OSS and Freeware).
There are two options left, both have their problems: play dirty (DDoS-ing windows.com, releasing viri that attack Win-XP boxen etc) and decent marketing (some money-problems there...). Firefox is doing great using the latter technique, But I'll confess that I feal attracted to the first on days like this.
I really think the OSS-movement needs one body with some serious money that play the marketing trick on the world. And I also think that is not going to happen if "we" can't settle debates like "vi vs emacs", "GPL vs BSD", "KDE vs GNOME" and "linux vs BSD".
AFAIK, SSE3 will be a requirement for the official releases. The patches you speak about are illegal (Maxxuss) patches, meant for, erm, "early adopters":)
I seriously doubt if Apple will support such patches, and I'm reasonably sure they will use an SSE3 CPU, for speeds sake with Rosetta and Quartz (CoreGraphics).
So, Dothan will run OS X x86, but won't run Rosetta (and all dependant PPC-apps) and Quartz unpatched. That would be a serious dissapointment for buyers of an early Macintel (slow graphics, no PPC-apps). Apple will wait for Yonah.
I highly doubt that. The Yonah-cores are due january, and I doubt if Intel will ship it as Celeron first. It's more likely that they ship it as Pentium M with the Celeron M following a few months later: too late for the introduction of a Celeron-based iBook in january.
They are not brainwashing this people with their OSS-ideologies, They are installing an operating system that they can fully try, test, optimize and support as the default. When someone gets a copy of OS X which installs on the damn thing (provided Steve doesn't put his hardware ideology and zealotry ahead of the wants or needs of these people) they can install it. Same goes for Windows. They have just chosen a default installation, and that is just reason, not zealotry.
The point is not that the users will need to tinker with the OS, but that the developers can in order to provide a tightly integrated OS on the system. Something that with a off-shelf proprietary general purpose OS just isn't possible.
That's why I didn't believe the story about the doctor too, but hey, I only studied biotechnology for one year with no result...
regarding the vaccin: I was referring to the person in TFA. There is indeed no known working vaccine for HIV, allthough I did paper-researched a proposed vaccine-method using viral particles for my study. Sounded promising, but they were missing detailed information about effective anti-bodies. Something this guy (from TFA) might have.
Not to troll or to flame anything, but my desktop PC is equipped with FreeBSD (read Linux for the rest of the post, it shouldn't be that different in this matter) with Xorg and the NVidia-drivers. It is running fine, and has done so recently for days in a row displaying the OpenGL screensaver (while I was upgrading everything from source).
Until this day, it never crashed. Perhaps your NVidia-chip is different (unsupported?) but with me, It Just Worked (TM).
(I have seen tremendous problems regarding displays on OS X though... this last comment was meant as a troll, mod me down;-) generally I'm happy when using anything Apple)
But given the facts that this man is gay, and evolution depends on natural selection, this immune-system will remain unique.
(For the record: this is not evolution in action, but at the most it is one man's luck with a mutation in his immune system. It would be evolution if this mutation spread within the population, thus diminishing HIV to a flu-like thread. Evolution requires genetic mutations and natural selection (read: offspring). There is no connection with the Black Death, the two virusses are completely unrelated)
I heard a story before about a British doctor who researched on HIV and got the virus by accident. He is believed to have cured himself by taking heavy antibiotics right away. Anyway, this man could have the anti-bodies needed for a proper medicin / vaccin. Great news, if it is true.
According to TFA she wasn't forced, but under American rules she either shouldn't have provided the eggs, or shouldn't have worked on the project.
The whole "forced" thing is nowhere to be seen (at least, not in the linked FA) nor is there any word about "pressuring" in TFA. What's more: I guess that under (South-)Korean rules there hasn't anything gone wrong with the whole thing. TFA is about an American scientist who withdrawed from the collaboration. Nothing more, nothing less.
MS and Google aren't competitors on the ordinary market, they are, however competitors on two markets that matter for businesses this size: employers (the really good cornerstone ones) and most importantly: the stock-market.
When Google has a burst while MS is going downhill (which happens with the stock-prizes when there is no growth in revenue) people will sell MS-stocks to buy Google-stocks. Result: MS-stocks are going downhill faster and Google has a bigger burst. MS really wants to stay away from that slippery slope. To do that, they must pretent to 'innovate' by entering new markets and trying to dominate that (they're doing a good job with the X-Box) and they always need to maximize their revenue.
The only way to destroy MS is by destroying their stock-value: if it's zero, the company's value as a whole is zero. So, who's got a few hundred of billions to spare...
Opera might me standards-compliant with ECMA, and that means it has less features in the language then Firefox and IE (stuff like designMode which is vital for proper real-world apps).
Give EyeOS a try. It shows some decent real-world apps.
A trademark always applicate to a certain extent. In this case, Windows is a trademark on the name of a piece of software (or maybe only an OS) alone. Naming something that has to do with pieces of glass stuffed into a car (windshields or car-windows) for example has nothing to do with the trademark Microsoft has.
Using the companies name is a different thing, but goes along the same lines (at least here in the Netherlands). I know at least three companies with the same name as the one I'm working at, and all four of them work in a different market while two of them are trademarked. Same goes for some of our products.
Where it comes to logotypes the rules are a bit more strict.
so in your example, there would be no problem or lawsuit at all. Both products could have the same name, but not the same logo though.
There is a trademark on the Windows name. It's not a TradeMark (TM) but a registered trademark (R). The question is if it's only applicable to operating systems or to software in general.
I use FreeBSD 5.3/5.4/6 as my desktop at home, at work and on my laptop. I find it easier to deploy there because of the vast amount of software available on it. That's the only reason really. I use it too on a few servers at work, I chose it there because of UFS2, and the easy installation of the needed software (from ports, yes, not from packages)
anyway, YMMV, I just plain like it. It's not as stable as FreeBSD 4 though, nor as robust as NetBSD/i386. I've just upgraded world and kernel on my workstation at home to 6-STABLE and are rebuilding all my packages. I won't go through that on any machine at work as long as it runs fine. I will definitely install 6.0-RELEASE or 6-STABLE at any new machine I need to deploy, especially on laptops.
At our forum, Gathering of Tweakers, the first pictures of AMD's Socket F have emerged. In may we wrote in that AMD has set a new CPU-socket on their roadmap. The new socket would have 1207 connection point and would be meant for multi-Opteron servers. To prevent that a CPU with support for DDR-memory is placed on a DDR2-socket and vice-versa, a new socket was needed. The extra pins which are available with this step are rumored to be used for an integrated PCI Epress-controller on the CPU. Noticable on the pictures is the clear separation in the middle of the socket. This seems to point out that each core of the dual-core Opteron gets its own group of contact-point and is truly treated as a separate CPU.
The pictures further show that Socket F, like Intels Socket 775, is bestowed the pins that contact the CPU. The CPU will not be put inside the socket, but this is a so-called LGA-socket. Socket F is by the way also called Socket 1207, but like Socket 479 only has 478 pins this model only has 1206, as shown by punctual counting. This socket also supports registered DDR II 533-, 667- and 800-memory and by doing so AMD ventures the competition with Intels FB DIMM plans. The latter wil introduce its dual-core platform dubbed Dempsey coming april, with among other thingsthe Greencreek chipset with support for FB DIMM-memory.
Even the dutch text was badly written, so excuses for the grammar and spelling. It's always hard to translate anything other than your own thoughts;)
Related? Yes, but NetBSD has essentially nothing to do with FreeBSD 4.
Matt Dillon started DragonflyBSD as the continuation of FreeBSD 4. FreeBSD 5 is is some ways more advanced than 4, but it is most clear that 4 is more stable, so there one *might* say that it is more similar to NetBSD.
For day to day use (on my desktop and on the servers I administer) I highly prefer FreeBSD 5. FreeBSD 4 or NetBSD might be better when stability is an issue, but I find FreeBSD 5 simply more easy to use.
Slashdot Mirror
And every single day without software patents is a huge victory, don't EVER forget that!
If everyone says something cannot be done, it will never happen. If there is hope for something, it is worth fighting for.
The answer is quite simple: let everyone use the docs at php.net and think for themselves. An experienced computer user (all other beings shouldn't program anyway, not even in a scripting language like PHP) will realize the security consequences involved.
;-) )
This might sound elite, but this is how I did. I used a book to learn the basics of SQL and I'm now teaching myself to use other ways to get rid of the security and efficiency issues I keep programming in MySQL-routines because of that dreaded book. I learned PHP using just the docs on php.net and I'm quite confident that I'm both efficient and secure in all my PHP-routines.
(all my boss ever wanted is that I would comment my scripts to 'easily replace' me 'when necessary'. I still don't quite get it
Could you please stop posting horrible ideas on a website that Microsoft-executives could read?!?
No.
If companies like Microsoft can change an official U.N. paper so easily, there is no way ordinary (non-geek) people will even know about Open Source alternatives. And everything that is propagated as "free" (either as in speech or as in beer) is considered "dangerous" (like: "there is no way software can be free, it MUST contain spyware or some other malicious threat. Microsoft says so!")
Really, I hear these things every damned day. I have a really hard time telling people that installing Win XP instead of Win 2k on their PII-233 is NOT making their PC run faster, so no one on earth is going to convince these people to use or trust OSS (unless you can teach them the difference between OSS and Freeware).
There are two options left, both have their problems: play dirty (DDoS-ing windows.com, releasing viri that attack Win-XP boxen etc) and decent marketing (some money-problems there...). Firefox is doing great using the latter technique, But I'll confess that I feal attracted to the first on days like this.
I really think the OSS-movement needs one body with some serious money that play the marketing trick on the world. And I also think that is not going to happen if "we" can't settle debates like "vi vs emacs", "GPL vs BSD", "KDE vs GNOME" and "linux vs BSD".
AFAIK, SSE3 will be a requirement for the official releases. The patches you speak about are illegal (Maxxuss) patches, meant for, erm, "early adopters" :)
I seriously doubt if Apple will support such patches, and I'm reasonably sure they will use an SSE3 CPU, for speeds sake with Rosetta and Quartz (CoreGraphics).
So, Dothan will run OS X x86, but won't run Rosetta (and all dependant PPC-apps) and Quartz unpatched. That would be a serious dissapointment for buyers of an early Macintel (slow graphics, no PPC-apps). Apple will wait for Yonah.
AFAIK the current Celeron does not support SSE2 and SSE3, which is a requirement
I highly doubt that. The Yonah-cores are due january, and I doubt if Intel will ship it as Celeron first. It's more likely that they ship it as Pentium M with the Celeron M following a few months later: too late for the introduction of a Celeron-based iBook in january.
I think you are missing the point here.
They are not brainwashing this people with their OSS-ideologies, They are installing an operating system that they can fully try, test, optimize and support as the default. When someone gets a copy of OS X which installs on the damn thing (provided Steve doesn't put his hardware ideology and zealotry ahead of the wants or needs of these people) they can install it. Same goes for Windows. They have just chosen a default installation, and that is just reason, not zealotry.
The point is not that the users will need to tinker with the OS, but that the developers can in order to provide a tightly integrated OS on the system. Something that with a off-shelf proprietary general purpose OS just isn't possible.
That's why I didn't believe the story about the doctor too, but hey, I only studied biotechnology for one year with no result...
regarding the vaccin: I was referring to the person in TFA. There is indeed no known working vaccine for HIV, allthough I did paper-researched a proposed vaccine-method using viral particles for my study. Sounded promising, but they were missing detailed information about effective anti-bodies. Something this guy (from TFA) might have.
Not to troll or to flame anything, but my desktop PC is equipped with FreeBSD (read Linux for the rest of the post, it shouldn't be that different in this matter) with Xorg and the NVidia-drivers. It is running fine, and has done so recently for days in a row displaying the OpenGL screensaver (while I was upgrading everything from source).
;-) generally I'm happy when using anything Apple)
Until this day, it never crashed. Perhaps your NVidia-chip is different (unsupported?) but with me, It Just Worked (TM).
(I have seen tremendous problems regarding displays on OS X though... this last comment was meant as a troll, mod me down
It's evolution in action
But given the facts that this man is gay, and evolution depends on natural selection, this immune-system will remain unique.
(For the record: this is not evolution in action, but at the most it is one man's luck with a mutation in his immune system. It would be evolution if this mutation spread within the population, thus diminishing HIV to a flu-like thread. Evolution requires genetic mutations and natural selection (read: offspring). There is no connection with the Black Death, the two virusses are completely unrelated)
I heard a story before about a British doctor who researched on HIV and got the virus by accident. He is believed to have cured himself by taking heavy antibiotics right away. Anyway, this man could have the anti-bodies needed for a proper medicin / vaccin. Great news, if it is true.
According to TFA she wasn't forced, but under American rules she either shouldn't have provided the eggs, or shouldn't have worked on the project.
The whole "forced" thing is nowhere to be seen (at least, not in the linked FA) nor is there any word about "pressuring" in TFA. What's more: I guess that under (South-)Korean rules there hasn't anything gone wrong with the whole thing. TFA is about an American scientist who withdrawed from the collaboration. Nothing more, nothing less.
In the meantime, you might give this a try...
fair enough :) thanks for the explanation!
MS and Google aren't competitors on the ordinary market, they are, however competitors on two markets that matter for businesses this size: employers (the really good cornerstone ones) and most importantly: the stock-market.
When Google has a burst while MS is going downhill (which happens with the stock-prizes when there is no growth in revenue) people will sell MS-stocks to buy Google-stocks. Result: MS-stocks are going downhill faster and Google has a bigger burst. MS really wants to stay away from that slippery slope. To do that, they must pretent to 'innovate' by entering new markets and trying to dominate that (they're doing a good job with the X-Box) and they always need to maximize their revenue.
The only way to destroy MS is by destroying their stock-value: if it's zero, the company's value as a whole is zero. So, who's got a few hundred of billions to spare...
Opera might me standards-compliant with ECMA, and that means it has less features in the language then Firefox and IE (stuff like designMode which is vital for proper real-world apps).
Give EyeOS a try. It shows some decent real-world apps.
In a world that runs on Windows XP, you can do whatever you like
Almost literal the TV-ads that hunts me down on the Dutch TV-stations. (They really seem to think that the world runs on Windows XP!)
A trademark always applicate to a certain extent. In this case, Windows is a trademark on the name of a piece of software (or maybe only an OS) alone. Naming something that has to do with pieces of glass stuffed into a car (windshields or car-windows) for example has nothing to do with the trademark Microsoft has.
Using the companies name is a different thing, but goes along the same lines (at least here in the Netherlands). I know at least three companies with the same name as the one I'm working at, and all four of them work in a different market while two of them are trademarked. Same goes for some of our products.
Where it comes to logotypes the rules are a bit more strict.
so in your example, there would be no problem or lawsuit at all. Both products could have the same name, but not the same logo though.
There is a trademark on the Windows name. It's not a TradeMark (TM) but a registered trademark (R). The question is if it's only applicable to operating systems or to software in general.
I use FreeBSD 5.3/5.4/6 as my desktop at home, at work and on my laptop. I find it easier to deploy there because of the vast amount of software available on it. That's the only reason really. I use it too on a few servers at work, I chose it there because of UFS2, and the easy installation of the needed software (from ports, yes, not from packages)
anyway, YMMV, I just plain like it. It's not as stable as FreeBSD 4 though, nor as robust as NetBSD/i386. I've just upgraded world and kernel on my workstation at home to 6-STABLE and are rebuilding all my packages. I won't go through that on any machine at work as long as it runs fine. I will definitely install 6.0-RELEASE or 6-STABLE at any new machine I need to deploy, especially on laptops.
Now imagine memory compatible with THAT!
I'm sorry, who came just all over you?
Even the dutch text was badly written, so excuses for the grammar and spelling. It's always hard to translate anything other than your own thoughts
4.3 BSD Reno -> BSD Net/2
BSD Net/2 -> NetBSD 0.8
BSD Net/2 -> 386BSD -> FreeBSD 1.0
4.3 BSD Reno -> 4.4 BSD Lite
NetBSD 0.8 + 4.4 BSD Lite -> NetBSD 1.0
FreeBSD 1.0 + 4.4 BSD Lite -> FreeBSD 2.0
(skipped some versions and connections)
Related? Yes, but NetBSD has essentially nothing to do with FreeBSD 4.
Matt Dillon started DragonflyBSD as the continuation of FreeBSD 4. FreeBSD 5 is is some ways more advanced than 4, but it is most clear that 4 is more stable, so there one *might* say that it is more similar to NetBSD.
For day to day use (on my desktop and on the servers I administer) I highly prefer FreeBSD 5. FreeBSD 4 or NetBSD might be better when stability is an issue, but I find FreeBSD 5 simply more easy to use.
Forbidden /rp/6137_cromwell_james_15.jpg
on this server.
You don't have permission to access
Apache/1.3.29 Server at images.absolutenow.com Port 80