With the current administration, they might not bat an eyelash at a Google-Yahoo merger, but the FTC doesn't break up monopolies just because they're monopolies. That's perfectly legal--the rules are in place to prevent companies from "cheating" to maintain their monopoly or leverage a monopoly to create new ones . . . like using an OS monopoly to establish an office suite monopoly, corporate e-mail monopoly, web browser monopoly and/or media player monopoly.
(as you can see, these rules have been working quite well in recent years. *rolls eyes*)
Utter bollocks. Visual Studio is a development environment that could be recompiled to work for any OS as long as it had appropriate components and libraries added to it for GUI work and such.
In principle, any application can be ported to another OS with all the necessary components and libraries. In Visual Studio's case, it's an IDE geared towards producing applications for windows. Sure, it supports some cross platform stuff like.Net, Silverlight and whatnot--but if you want to use it for its primary purpose, and especially if you'd like to actually test your applications, you're going to need the whole Win32 API somewhere.
So, strictly speaking, the code for Visual Studio might not be so "inextricably tied to windows," but its primary reason for being pretty much is.
Huh? How does one do a "processor reset" and what problems would that fix? If a system's unresponsive, cold booting clears the memory, restarts any misbehaving processes, reinitializes hardware devices, tosses virtual memory etc. There are lots of things that can get screwed up in a running system. Sometimes it's hardware, sometimes it's software and sometimes it's some weird combination of both.
UV turns the molecules black and time or heat flips them back to "blank" state so exposing the whole page to UV ought to just turn the whole page black.
A large part of the FOSS movement is about making money. The FOSS philosophy posits that freely distributing code and encourage others to share and share alike creates more value than closing it off and slapping a price tag on the bits. While "everyone can review and modify sourcecode" is true in principle--not everyone has the knowledge or desire to do so and are willing to pay people to modify code how they want it.
Also, enterprise customers want support contracts and they'll pay quite a lot for that.
Canonical ain't a charity organization. They're in it to make money, and they intend to get it by paid support contracts and maybe change orders. I don't perceive that as selling out--it's right in line with what FOSS represents.
With half-lives on the order of millions of years, small amounts can still be around today at nowhere near the levels of naturally occuring (and remaining) Uranium. We also don't know how precise the conditions to create the element have to be, nor the probability or rate such events would occur in a given supernova.
It's important, but I'd hardly call it one of the greatest discoveries made. It just confirms what we've suspected all along--There are stable elements past Uranium. There's a very narrow set of conditions that can synthesize them, and we haven't had alot of luck in the labs, but now that we know nature's managed it, we can possibly devise new experiments better aimed at sucessfuly generating these heavier elements.
As far as how it got there naturally--presumably the same way all the naturally occuring heavy elements came to be--Supernovae billions of years ago.
Not at the moment. It's got full bluetooth support in the hardware--it's just firmware crippled--so I don't see any reason it can't be added with an update . . . but I doubt it's a priority for Apple, so you're stuck waiting for a hack (if someone hasn't created on already).
Correlation != Causation. I don't know where you're numbers come from, but the 12-15 percent of the general population figure agrees with a quick bit of Googling. Determining the demographics amongst all professional athletes is much more difficult. Are you looking at primarilly basketball and football? What about baseball, soccer, hockey, swimming, golf, equestrian sports, etc?
We can spout off and conjecture all we like about why blacks might dominate certain professional sports--maybe it's a mix of physiolgical differences, cultural upbringing, politics and/or economics--but is there any compelling evidence why blacks might be particularly suited for certain sports beyond having more individuals participating in those sports?
As a technologically inclined website, I would think we'd be more concerned with the potential latency issues of orbital IP networks . . . what kind of latency should we expect in knuckle-to-eye units?
Why would they do that if selling them is profitable? It's not like many of the customers buying sub-$300 tiny laptops are gonna happily buy something double the size and double the price.
Yeah, because win.ini holds all relevant configuration information in modern versions of Windows. Seriously, have you ever mucked around in regedit? A whole file system-esque tree of (often) arcanely labelled keys with text, binary, hexadecimal values, etc. *nix conf files can be scattered to odd places and arcane to work with too, but the Windows registry is *at least* equally cumbersome to work with.
If you screw up the registry badly enough, your Windows install is toast. Borking enough *nix conf files will ruin your day too, but it's a lot easier to pop in a LiveCD and working with the plain text conf files than playing with the Windows repair console or third party tools, imho.
No. That's the key difference between the GPL and permissive licenses like BSD and MIT. You cannot take GPL code, modify it, and re-release it as a closed source product. The terms of the license explicitly state that you must provide source code with any modified or derived version you distribute.
*UNLESS* you are the sole copyright holder to the GPLed work and any outside contributors have assigned copyright to you, in which case you can re-release it under whatever license you please (of course, the most recent GPLed version remains in the wild and can be forked by the community).
Not to mention any talk about banning taxes is pretty much irresponsible considering the debt we are incurring.
Not to mention any talk about exercise is pretty much irresponsible considering the amount of lard we're eating.
My libertarian side is poking out a touch, but I've always felt that the more you feed the beast, the more gluttonous it becomes. There are few who would disagree that the government wastes lots and lots of money. Money that can be better spent doing anything BUT the government's bidding. If expenses exceed income, the best solution is not to increase income--it's nice when that's possible, but seldom is--but to reduce expenses. Even on a personal level, getting a higher paying job is often nice, but it's not something a person should count on if they're living beyond their means.
I have a cheap TN panel on my desktop. Price was more important to me than image quality. Text is legible, and it was a far sight better than my el-cheapo CRT that was on its last legs. If I was using it as a TV, for video games, photo editing, whatnot, I'd have dropped more money on a better screen . . . but it just wasn't worth it for me at the time.
Even flat panel displays for desktops are jumping on the glossy bandwagon. I suspect it's because glossy models sell better. People see them on the shelves, "oooooh, shiny!" and buy them without regard for actual useability.
I could be wrong, but I believe Thinkpads are still mostly, if not all, matte screns.
If the books were 50 years old when the professor first studied them 30 years ago, they were published in the late 20s/early 30s. If the subject matter was about the aftermath of World War I, or the run-up to the Great Depression, etc. then yeah, as long as those authors were credible, a part of those events, bonus points for physical evidence bolstering their writings--those are primary sources with corroboration. Much more trustworthy than basing your entire knowledge on other people's summaries and opinions. You also have the benefit of being able to follow the reference trail and read the first hand accounts yourself.
There's no way to know. On one hand, you could say that the first planck second into the big bang everything that would ever happen in the universe was already determined. This assumes that even seemingly random quantum effects are the results of some underlying deterministic principles.
I feel our observations so far all seem to suggest that there's more than enough "white noise" and randomness on all scales from quarks to quasars that we'll never have the ability to predict anything beyond a probability distribution. I don't believe the universe is deterministic. It feels like I have free will, so honestly, who gives sh*t if I really don't? Even if we uncovered all the physical laws and could perfectly model the future, you still can't predict your own future--model your next action, but then revise your model to include what you did modeling your next action, then revise the model again . . . etc. Infinite loop.
You do realize that the nuclear fuel for a nuclear spacecraft will have to come from the Earth's surface . . . and be launched into orbit on a rocket . . . which might explode/disintegrate/or otherwise scatter radioactive material over a large area in the even of a problem . . .
I lived in Marietta for two years--I have never seen so much pollen in my entire life. There were literally mounds of nothing but pollen that accumulated against street curbs. When it rained, you'd get big green-yellow pollen slicks, and your car would be covered in green-yellow dust as if someone took a 5 pound bag of the stuff and shook it all over your driveway. Insane.
What's wrong with what I said? Presumably, the camera is situated to photograph the license plate of a car running a red light, so under normal circumstances, the car would always be moving away from the camera when the picture snaps. In order to get the car photographed coming towards the camera, the car would have to be moving backwards through the intersection.
Slashdot Mirror
With the current administration, they might not bat an eyelash at a Google-Yahoo merger, but the FTC doesn't break up monopolies just because they're monopolies. That's perfectly legal--the rules are in place to prevent companies from "cheating" to maintain their monopoly or leverage a monopoly to create new ones . . . like using an OS monopoly to establish an office suite monopoly, corporate e-mail monopoly, web browser monopoly and/or media player monopoly.
(as you can see, these rules have been working quite well in recent years. *rolls eyes*)
In principle, any application can be ported to another OS with all the necessary components and libraries. In Visual Studio's case, it's an IDE geared towards producing applications for windows. Sure, it supports some cross platform stuff like .Net, Silverlight and whatnot--but if you want to use it for its primary purpose, and especially if you'd like to actually test your applications, you're going to need the whole Win32 API somewhere.
So, strictly speaking, the code for Visual Studio might not be so "inextricably tied to windows," but its primary reason for being pretty much is.
Huh? How does one do a "processor reset" and what problems would that fix? If a system's unresponsive, cold booting clears the memory, restarts any misbehaving processes, reinitializes hardware devices, tosses virtual memory etc. There are lots of things that can get screwed up in a running system. Sometimes it's hardware, sometimes it's software and sometimes it's some weird combination of both.
Nuke it from orbit. It's the only way to be sure.
UV turns the molecules black and time or heat flips them back to "blank" state so exposing the whole page to UV ought to just turn the whole page black.
A large part of the FOSS movement is about making money. The FOSS philosophy posits that freely distributing code and encourage others to share and share alike creates more value than closing it off and slapping a price tag on the bits. While "everyone can review and modify sourcecode" is true in principle--not everyone has the knowledge or desire to do so and are willing to pay people to modify code how they want it.
Also, enterprise customers want support contracts and they'll pay quite a lot for that.
Canonical ain't a charity organization. They're in it to make money, and they intend to get it by paid support contracts and maybe change orders. I don't perceive that as selling out--it's right in line with what FOSS represents.
What does "rsn" mean?
With half-lives on the order of millions of years, small amounts can still be around today at nowhere near the levels of naturally occuring (and remaining) Uranium. We also don't know how precise the conditions to create the element have to be, nor the probability or rate such events would occur in a given supernova.
It's important, but I'd hardly call it one of the greatest discoveries made. It just confirms what we've suspected all along--There are stable elements past Uranium. There's a very narrow set of conditions that can synthesize them, and we haven't had alot of luck in the labs, but now that we know nature's managed it, we can possibly devise new experiments better aimed at sucessfuly generating these heavier elements.
As far as how it got there naturally--presumably the same way all the naturally occuring heavy elements came to be--Supernovae billions of years ago.
Not at the moment. It's got full bluetooth support in the hardware--it's just firmware crippled--so I don't see any reason it can't be added with an update . . . but I doubt it's a priority for Apple, so you're stuck waiting for a hack (if someone hasn't created on already).
Correlation != Causation. I don't know where you're numbers come from, but the 12-15 percent of the general population figure agrees with a quick bit of Googling. Determining the demographics amongst all professional athletes is much more difficult. Are you looking at primarilly basketball and football? What about baseball, soccer, hockey, swimming, golf, equestrian sports, etc?
We can spout off and conjecture all we like about why blacks might dominate certain professional sports--maybe it's a mix of physiolgical differences, cultural upbringing, politics and/or economics--but is there any compelling evidence why blacks might be particularly suited for certain sports beyond having more individuals participating in those sports?
As a technologically inclined website, I would think we'd be more concerned with the potential latency issues of orbital IP networks . . . what kind of latency should we expect in knuckle-to-eye units?
Why would they do that if selling them is profitable? It's not like many of the customers buying sub-$300 tiny laptops are gonna happily buy something double the size and double the price.
Yeah, because win.ini holds all relevant configuration information in modern versions of Windows. Seriously, have you ever mucked around in regedit? A whole file system-esque tree of (often) arcanely labelled keys with text, binary, hexadecimal values, etc. *nix conf files can be scattered to odd places and arcane to work with too, but the Windows registry is *at least* equally cumbersome to work with.
If you screw up the registry badly enough, your Windows install is toast. Borking enough *nix conf files will ruin your day too, but it's a lot easier to pop in a LiveCD and working with the plain text conf files than playing with the Windows repair console or third party tools, imho.
Yesterday afternoon
No. That's the key difference between the GPL and permissive licenses like BSD and MIT. You cannot take GPL code, modify it, and re-release it as a closed source product. The terms of the license explicitly state that you must provide source code with any modified or derived version you distribute.
*UNLESS* you are the sole copyright holder to the GPLed work and any outside contributors have assigned copyright to you, in which case you can re-release it under whatever license you please (of course, the most recent GPLed version remains in the wild and can be forked by the community).
Perhaps this machine could assist in our efforts to run through all possible permutations to discover the true name of God. . .
Not to mention any talk about exercise is pretty much irresponsible considering the amount of lard we're eating.
My libertarian side is poking out a touch, but I've always felt that the more you feed the beast, the more gluttonous it becomes. There are few who would disagree that the government wastes lots and lots of money. Money that can be better spent doing anything BUT the government's bidding. If expenses exceed income, the best solution is not to increase income--it's nice when that's possible, but seldom is--but to reduce expenses. Even on a personal level, getting a higher paying job is often nice, but it's not something a person should count on if they're living beyond their means.
I have a cheap TN panel on my desktop. Price was more important to me than image quality. Text is legible, and it was a far sight better than my el-cheapo CRT that was on its last legs. If I was using it as a TV, for video games, photo editing, whatnot, I'd have dropped more money on a better screen . . . but it just wasn't worth it for me at the time.
Even flat panel displays for desktops are jumping on the glossy bandwagon. I suspect it's because glossy models sell better. People see them on the shelves, "oooooh, shiny!" and buy them without regard for actual useability.
I could be wrong, but I believe Thinkpads are still mostly, if not all, matte screns.
If the books were 50 years old when the professor first studied them 30 years ago, they were published in the late 20s/early 30s. If the subject matter was about the aftermath of World War I, or the run-up to the Great Depression, etc. then yeah, as long as those authors were credible, a part of those events, bonus points for physical evidence bolstering their writings--those are primary sources with corroboration. Much more trustworthy than basing your entire knowledge on other people's summaries and opinions. You also have the benefit of being able to follow the reference trail and read the first hand accounts yourself.
There's no way to know. On one hand, you could say that the first planck second into the big bang everything that would ever happen in the universe was already determined. This assumes that even seemingly random quantum effects are the results of some underlying deterministic principles.
I feel our observations so far all seem to suggest that there's more than enough "white noise" and randomness on all scales from quarks to quasars that we'll never have the ability to predict anything beyond a probability distribution. I don't believe the universe is deterministic. It feels like I have free will, so honestly, who gives sh*t if I really don't? Even if we uncovered all the physical laws and could perfectly model the future, you still can't predict your own future--model your next action, but then revise your model to include what you did modeling your next action, then revise the model again . . . etc. Infinite loop.
You do realize that the nuclear fuel for a nuclear spacecraft will have to come from the Earth's surface . . . and be launched into orbit on a rocket . . . which might explode/disintegrate/or otherwise scatter radioactive material over a large area in the even of a problem . . .
I really hope nobody manages to break physics ANY time soon. We all remember the mess it made the last time that happened.
I lived in Marietta for two years--I have never seen so much pollen in my entire life. There were literally mounds of nothing but pollen that accumulated against street curbs. When it rained, you'd get big green-yellow pollen slicks, and your car would be covered in green-yellow dust as if someone took a 5 pound bag of the stuff and shook it all over your driveway. Insane.
What's wrong with what I said? Presumably, the camera is situated to photograph the license plate of a car running a red light, so under normal circumstances, the car would always be moving away from the camera when the picture snaps. In order to get the car photographed coming towards the camera, the car would have to be moving backwards through the intersection.