For the record, could you cite your references? Because... well... without them how do I know you're not the one re-writing history? (Please take this in the best possible way. I'm with you about avoiding revisionist history. That's why I'm requesting references.)
The machine is simplest, the way you right programs on it (i.e. encode the initial tape) is what is one out of the 2,985,984 possible and is far from simple.
Microsoft will publish an irrevocable pledge not to assert any patents it may have over the interoperability information against non-commercial open source software development projects.
Sounds like they can still go after Sambda, just not for parts that talk to Windows servers.
Internet providers are not common carriers. In this case I wish they were. I have seen that claim made multiple times. Could someone elaborate?
Why aren't they common carriers? Why did people ever think they were?
If they are not common carriers, are they liable for the data they transmit?
If they are not liable, why? If they are liable, why haven't they all been sued/arrested into oblivion? Etc.
Good definition. But where does spam/virus blocking fit into this? One could say that spam is "just" an e-mail like any other.
Even more importantly, how would you write a law that avoid the sort of unintended consequences that arise when these are confused (e.g. someone claiming that virus blocking is censorship).
This is an excellent example of how what we think of as ethical derives not from a god, but rather from evolved justifications of behavior. There's a mighty struggle going on to re-define taking music without the author's permission as ethical, based on the ego-soothing concepts that it's really in their interest.
Within ethics there is a distinction between rules as ends
(e.g. the ones that "derive from a god") and rules as means
to satisfy the rules as ends.
For example, the speed limit is a means to achieve the end of not putting the lives of others at unnecessary risk.
As such the fact that speed limits might be changed over time says nothing about whether other ethical rules are "derived from a god".
Copyright is the same way. It is and has always been a human construct.
It was invented by humans 500 years ago to serve various ends which have changed over time
such as censorship, promoting the useful arts or supporting artist's livelihoods.
Copyright is not an inherent right.
So the fact that it might change over time is quite natural
even for those who believe that some ethical rules are "derived from a god".
Sorry to disappoint you, but this is not a microkernel.
This is just slimming down on what is packaged with the OS.
Think more along the lines of sliming Red Hat Linux down to the size of Damn Small Linux,
except right now Windows has the shell, X11, Gnome, etc. all running in kernel mode.
The continuum looks something like this:
Everything (shell, graphics system, window manager, etc.) in the kernel. (This is Windows as it is now.)
Modularization to the level where different configurations can be distributed. (This is what it sounds like Windows 7 is going for.)
Major subsystems (shell, etc.) moved into userspace, but still with a lot of stuff in kernel space (drivers, filesystems, etc.). (This is what Linux is now.)
Everything moved into userspace that possibly can (Usually only threads, IPC and address spaces are left in kernel space). (This is a true microkernel.)
"Spreadsheets with First-Class Functions and Objects"
This is just a spreadsheet with the ability to put functions and other objects into cells. It's a good idea, but there is no need to dress this up in marketspeak. We understand techno-babel just fine here.
What causes these moments to cease to exist? Does the next moment replace the previous one?
<hand_wave>
Conservation of energy *mumble* parallel universes living on borrowed time/energy due to the Heisenberg uncertainty principal *shuffle* clouds of virtual universes collapse back into the universe we know as Reality.
</hand_wave>
(Yes, I know this is wrong and there are a dozen counter arguments. Not the least of which is that I'm probably mixing different branches of Quantum Mechanics. But it still sounds more plausible than most of the Science Fiction/Popular Science News out there so I couldn't resist.)
No. Religion is explicitly prohibited as a reason for discrimination. What the manager did was not at all unconstitutional. If it was in violation of anything, it was corporate policy. No it's not. It's not allowed for the government to discriminate, but private entities are free to discriminate all they want to.
Almost, but not quite. There are quite a few laws in the USA and other places that prevent private entities from discriminating. This is especially true in the area of employement.
This is a very sticky topic where there are few simple generalities.
For example, if Microsoft refused to employ female programmers, they would probably get sued.
On the other hand, trying to sue a religious organization because they won't ordain as ministers (i.e. employ) certain segments of society (e.g. non-believers) probably wouldn't pass the laugh test.
All that said, discriminating against selling to age-challenged flunkies is probably legal though against store policy.
Trent is to the RIAA...what the Anti-Christ is to the Catholics. You do realize that the Anti-Christ looses to the Catholics/Christians in the end, right?
So you trust Microsoft to write your computer's entire operating system, but you're afraid that a patch might contain something nefarious? The patch doesn't contain something nefarious. The patch is something nefarious. It changes the OS without the users consent. The change itself may be benign, but doing it behind the user's back is not all right.
Unlike Linux or OS X, when you use XP or Vista, you do not have control over your computer. Umm... how does one have more control with OS X than Windows? Different company, same potential problem. (Darwin doesn't count because OS X is more than just Darwin.)
The "evolution" here is externally, not internally, driven.
The Storm botnet isn't making itself better (through natural selection or otherwise). The best that could be said for it is that it is getting bigger. As far as actually improving the sophistication of attacks, it is still about people are learning how to make better botnets.
It's the difference between "John is improving" and "John is being improved".
It's just too bad "The botnet is being evolved" isn't good grammar; that is what is actually happening.
Seriously, somewhere, there ought to be a way of tracking the stormbot people back to its originators. Tor was designed to make this sort of tracking hard to do.
The idea was to help protect free speech from totalitarian governments.
The trouble is that in this case the "free speech" is a trojan/botnet
and the "totalitarian government" is anyone trying to stop this botnet.
The mineral absorbs "radioactive substances", not the radiation itself.
While radiation poisoning can occur due to exposure to radiation and transmutation
of the isotopes in the exposed substance, that particular effect is relatively minor.
The larger concern is that in the process of running a neuclear power plant,
tiny flakes of the radioactive power rod detach and mix with flakes
from other parts in the machinery thus forming a radioative dust. Since dust is so
easily transfered, if I touch the dust and then I touch a book and then you touch the book,
you may get a small amount of this radioactive dust on you. I didn't really make
the book radioactive as much as I put dust that was radioactive on it.
(Radiation suits don't actaully protect from direct radiation,
they just make sure you don't track radioactive dust through the rest
of the station.)
My guess is that this mineral is just filtering out heavy radioactive metals
(i.e. taking the radioactive part of the dust out of the dust).
No, the real issue is that piracy is partially responsible for these measures being taken,
and at least some of the blame needs to rest with the consumer.
Mr. Sony: Your Honor, it's not my fault I broke in to John's house. I only broke a few windows in the process. I was just trying to figure out if he was the one that stole my stuff. Those people who keep stealing my stuff, it's their fault.
Judge: Riiight, sure, sure.
That argument wouldn't fly in the physical world, and it doesn't fly in the virtual world either.
Actually this is one of the big one's that is not allowed.
They can make being searched a condition of entry, but
you must have the option to leave at any time.
Legal: "You have to let us search you before we'll let you in." (This is a free exchange.)
Illegal: "You have to let us search you before we'll let you leave." (This is false imprisonment.)
Legal (I think): "If at any time you don't let us search you then we'll kick you out."
As to this being a contract, there are certain rights that you can't sign away, so I don't think that sort of argument would hold water.
IANAL, so don't take my word for it.
See what the ACLU has to say about it,
"
BUSTED: The Citizen's Guide to Surviving Police Encounters".
(Most of that video is about dealing with searches by police
but they do briefly cover searches by non-police.)
Slashdot Mirror
For the record, could you cite your references? Because ... well ... without them how do I know you're not the one re-writing history? (Please take this in the best possible way. I'm with you about avoiding revisionist history. That's why I'm requesting references.)
The machine is simplest, the way you right programs on it (i.e. encode the initial tape) is what is one out of the 2,985,984 possible and is far from simple.
Sounds like they can still go after Sambda, just not for parts that talk to Windows servers.
Until someone can show me a way to write a law that is able to do that, I have to remain leery of the idea of legislating NN.
Good definition. But where does spam/virus blocking fit into this? One could say that spam is "just" an e-mail like any other.
Even more importantly, how would you write a law that avoid the sort of unintended consequences that arise when these are confused (e.g. someone claiming that virus blocking is censorship).
If the President lets the bill sit in a drawer for 10 days the bill passes.
A pocket veto is only if Congress adjourns before the 10 days are up and the present doesn't sign it in that time.
Within ethics there is a distinction between rules as ends (e.g. the ones that "derive from a god") and rules as means to satisfy the rules as ends.
For example, the speed limit is a means to achieve the end of not putting the lives of others at unnecessary risk. As such the fact that speed limits might be changed over time says nothing about whether other ethical rules are "derived from a god".
Copyright is the same way. It is and has always been a human construct. It was invented by humans 500 years ago to serve various ends which have changed over time such as censorship, promoting the useful arts or supporting artist's livelihoods.
Copyright is not an inherent right. So the fact that it might change over time is quite natural even for those who believe that some ethical rules are "derived from a god".
This doesn't seem like a neutrality issue to me.
Isn't this closer to a customer just paying for a lower latency connection?
Sorry to disappoint you, but this is not a microkernel. This is just slimming down on what is packaged with the OS.
Think more along the lines of sliming Red Hat Linux down to the size of Damn Small Linux, except right now Windows has the shell, X11, Gnome, etc. all running in kernel mode.
The continuum looks something like this:
"Spreadsheets with First-Class Functions and Objects"
This is just a spreadsheet with the ability to put functions and other objects into cells. It's a good idea, but there is no need to dress this up in marketspeak. We understand techno-babel just fine here.
Oh, please do tell. I think it would be interesting to hear about their "hare-brained" schemes. (Unless doing that would be illegal =-0.)
<hand_wave>
Conservation of energy *mumble* parallel universes living on borrowed time/energy due to the Heisenberg uncertainty principal *shuffle* clouds of virtual universes collapse back into the universe we know as Reality.
</hand_wave>
(Yes, I know this is wrong and there are a dozen counter arguments. Not the least of which is that I'm probably mixing different branches of Quantum Mechanics. But it still sounds more plausible than most of the Science Fiction/Popular Science News out there so I couldn't resist.)
Almost, but not quite. There are quite a few laws in the USA and other places that prevent private entities from discriminating. This is especially true in the area of employement.
This is a very sticky topic where there are few simple generalities. For example, if Microsoft refused to employ female programmers, they would probably get sued. On the other hand, trying to sue a religious organization because they won't ordain as ministers (i.e. employ) certain segments of society (e.g. non-believers) probably wouldn't pass the laugh test.
All that said, discriminating against selling to age-challenged flunkies is probably legal though against store policy.
The "evolution" here is externally, not internally, driven.
The Storm botnet isn't making itself better (through natural selection or otherwise). The best that could be said for it is that it is getting bigger. As far as actually improving the sophistication of attacks, it is still about people are learning how to make better botnets.
It's the difference between "John is improving" and "John is being improved". It's just too bad "The botnet is being evolved" isn't good grammar; that is what is actually happening.
Since there are no gas stations in the middle of the Atlantic, aren't most boats already designed to cross it on one tank?
The mineral absorbs "radioactive substances", not the radiation itself.
While radiation poisoning can occur due to exposure to radiation and transmutation of the isotopes in the exposed substance, that particular effect is relatively minor.
The larger concern is that in the process of running a neuclear power plant, tiny flakes of the radioactive power rod detach and mix with flakes from other parts in the machinery thus forming a radioative dust. Since dust is so easily transfered, if I touch the dust and then I touch a book and then you touch the book, you may get a small amount of this radioactive dust on you. I didn't really make the book radioactive as much as I put dust that was radioactive on it. (Radiation suits don't actaully protect from direct radiation, they just make sure you don't track radioactive dust through the rest of the station.)
My guess is that this mineral is just filtering out heavy radioactive metals (i.e. taking the radioactive part of the dust out of the dust).
Mr. Sony: Your Honor, it's not my fault I broke in to John's house. I only broke a few windows in the process. I was just trying to figure out if he was the one that stole my stuff. Those people who keep stealing my stuff, it's their fault.
Judge: Riiight, sure, sure.
That argument wouldn't fly in the physical world, and it doesn't fly in the virtual world either.
If Sony doesn't have anything to hide, why did they sneak in a root kit instead of being up front about the hole thing?
(Apologies to the AC who's post I'm going to rip and jurisdiction-shift from the UK to the USA. Words changed are in bold.)
In the USA (except North Carolina), a private citizen can only conduct a citizen's arrest:
- If you physically witness a felony crime being committed.
- If a police officer tells you to (ie. helping out when the copper is outnumbered).
See Wikipedia: Citizen's Arrest.Actually this is one of the big one's that is not allowed. They can make being searched a condition of entry, but you must have the option to leave at any time.
As to this being a contract, there are certain rights that you can't sign away, so I don't think that sort of argument would hold water.
IANAL, so don't take my word for it. See what the ACLU has to say about it, " BUSTED: The Citizen's Guide to Surviving Police Encounters". (Most of that video is about dealing with searches by police but they do briefly cover searches by non-police.)