Why people feel that Google is obligated to do anything with their search results. They have the right to censor their search results however they like - their search results do not affect the existence of actual websites.
The bundling of IE with Windows didn't negate the existance of Netscape nor the ability to install it.
Once a company reaches a certain level of dominance it then takes on additional scrutiny. Google has just about reached a point where it could control the ability for a commercial website to succeed. With that power, practices like changing search results based on how much money they receive could be seen as coercive. It is even more than that. I am sure there are docs and press releases from google inc that search results from google are machine-only, that can be seen as a pledge that they don't mess with them. If they do, that would be false advertisement and punishable by law.
Hard disks are faster than Flash RAM for raw transfer speed, but the idea here is to use the Flash to cache small frequently-read files where the hard disk's latency and seek time would be the limiting factor. I really, really don't believe that those small frequently-read files should be on the swap anyway! But I suppose ReadyBoost might have a point, dunno. However it's not this one.
If that was it, then the security team has won the game! Alas... I think it is asking for everything, therefore asking for nothing. An automatic OK is just as bad as no confirmation asked. Even worse, IMHO.
And what if that 5% of the market were the deciding part - like... a friend asks a geek - which one to choose, NV or ATI? Is he not going to trust the geek?
So what? It's me who's dead, remember? Not you, me.
Besides, if his brakes were bad, and I was deaf, or a small child alone, he would have hit me anyway. Even more, if he doesn't drive responsibly (i.e. 50 miles while crossing a walk is NOT acceptable), it is his fault, no matter what I do. In my country, a walk is not required to be marked, but all intersections ARE walks, sans the ones with an underpass. Indeed, it is very hard for the pedestrian to be guilty.
Why the HELL was that modded as troll? He has actually a very good point. Wasn't the annihilation of the native americans a terrorist act or not? If you see the world history, 99% of all freedom fighters could be considered terrorists one way or another. 100 years ago practically nobody would blow stuff on citizens, mainly because there was practically no media coverage of the fact (there was practically no media). A line in a newspaper is far from the impact of a video clip.
I know mods are sometimes scared shitless of terrorists, but I can't understand why you have to mod as a troll everyone that states their very measured opinion, even without saying the names of the countries - namely USA and Israel. The fact that you could so easily understand who he's talking about gives him even more credit, because if we're measured by our actions, so should be countries.
In the hands of someone like Iran who wants a war with the US for some religious experience, it would suck. But the problem there is mre to the importance of Iran, Not to many people care about them outside their ability to make war with others. With WMDs the MAD principle fails because it would force people to change that opinion. And when a country is starving for attention, It is likley it will get some one way or another. Your post was very interesting untill that part, and I suppose that is why the mods have marked it as a troll. If you refresh your knowledge about Iran (even the wikipedia article will do) you'll quickly notice that Iran has been *against* the use of WMDs, check Iran-Iraq war for more info. Besides, Iran still claims they *don't* want nuclear weapons, just the energy.
OTOH, I remember a while ago some US official making remarks on using tactical nuclear devices. I am sure they are not as dangerous as the rest of the arsenal, but "HOW DARE THEY SPEAK AGAINST IRAN, IF THEY ARE EVEN CONSIDERING SUCH A THING AN OPTION???".
Besides, in Iran people from different religions seems to have more freedom than in the rest of the middle east - as in jews can drink wine, which muslims are not allowed. More than that, they are democracy. Iran has such diversity, that it is very hard to rule without cutting somebody's freedom, but they manage just fine. They are one of the oldest civilization, as in more-than-300-years. More like 3000 years. They have a heritage to defend.
Dunno about cryptographers, but Gentoo uses that already. Just see: * portage-2.1.1.tar.bz2 MD5 * portage-2.1.1.tar.bz2 RMD160 * portage-2.1.1.tar.bz2 SHA1 * portage-2.1.1.tar.bz2 SHA256 * portage-2.1.1.tar.bz2 size
By the way, this is not a bad solution, since it uses industrial standards. The problem is that if you can't use this solution: i.e. want to store the hash of a password to check, you can't use this method, as brute forcing will still wield the same result.
Well... without AI it is just impossible to distinguish between troll and off-topic first posts and on-topic fp-s.\ Besides, if they want to spend their karma this way... let them do it. Democracy at it's best:).
There is *no pressure* on Apple to bow down to any of the EUs demands. They have gotten to a point where they can exit such restrictive markets. Oh, just as viable as MS quitting because of the lawsuit.:) I know, I know, we're not talking about the largest market in the world with GDP way over the US. We're talkin' 'bout damned hippies.
1. And this helps the end user exactly how? 2. Go get and try the new Ubuntu, and you'll see you're 6-months old point is too old now. 3. Well... since the 3D desktop is one of the most innovative features in Vista, if it was the state of the art it would be the best your comment could hope for. Since it is not, yes, many operating systems had it years before that. 4. And since it is here, how it is going to help the users exactly? It is a deterioriation of the OS anyway. 5. Yup, but we're talking about paying customers here. Even then, are you're paying for MSDNAA? 6. 7. And this is in favor of why users will switch to Vista? You're parent was about reasons not to switch, you're answer just gives him the best argument in favor:). 8. Yes, if you are forced to upgrade, you presumably throw the old computer. And acquire a new one. This makes more trash.
The parent was not about "how much ubuntu and linux is general is better than windows", it was about 10 reasons not to switch from xp to vista. If you don't switch, great. If you do have to, just you might consider not getting on the same train again. We're happy you're using windows and you're content with it, just like we're using linux and are content with it.
It is kind of funny, but I am one of the users with most licensed software on my computer. Granted I mainly use Gentoo, I have an XP with paid license on the laptop, and my office is The Open one.
Anyway, I don't believe that people think of themselves as criminals. You must note that LAW makes the criminals, and if the law is such that 90% of the people are, they can overthrow it.
The reality is that even though the law is not in favor of the ordinary bootlegers (read: citizens) on this matter, the lawsuits are so rare and unsuccessful (when not plain stupid), that people mostly just ignore them. And although people infringe copyright frequently, most of them want to stop doing it if they have a chance and money (USA and most of Europe is an exception in the income part, you know).
I am fully for the use of licensed software, because I believe that this would be a big push for open source. However, it is not going to happen anytime soon.
I say... why don't we call it "using freely the idea somebody thought of, in an unlicensed way?". Or "sharing our possesions with friends and strangers"?
That'll look much more like the real thing, don't ya think? After all, we're not stealing the physical medium. And EULAs are not valid contracts in half of the world.
All I want is to show how easy would be to start (another) flaming war, when the proper rhetoric is used. If you feel that using unlicensed software and art is stealing, so be it, but please, don't try to force your view of the world on the rest of us. And besides, the legal term is more accurate. Just like libre is better suited for GNU than free.
10x:) I can't understand why I was modded as flaimbait (your GP), when my post was so moderate and I tried to explain what MAD is and how the GGP is wrong. But I suppose there are people that can't read past the first line.
The only reason Iran and Syria don't overwhelm Israel is because they would surely be destroyed by Israel's nuclear weapons. The reason Iran and Syria would want nuclear weapons is not so they can immediately launch them at Israel, but so that they can create a situation of mutually assured destruction and then wage conventional warfare (which they have much better odds of winning).
Please, tell me where you got the crack you're smoking. First of all, Iran does not want Israel to exist, but half of the world don't want USA to exist. So what? Did someone launch a nuke to destroy you? Later, a conventional warfare cannot happen if nukes exist on both sides, because the looser will launch them in the prospect of losing. Therefore, Iran (I don't know about Syria) wants them for their own protection, so Israel would not start another week war, escalate the middle-east problem (them) just for the sake of it. And last, Israel with proven no nukes will likely not be attacked with conventional weapons. Anyway, why do you protect a country based on terror against the native palestinians?
Because a passenger airplane can be used as a cruise missile. While I'm sure it can be done, it's a lot harder to take out a building in a densely populated urban area with a train. Also, the kind of explosion one can create with carry-on luggage liquids probably won't kill many people on a train. At best, it would probably only take out that particular car. On a plane, you don't need that large of an explosion to bring the whole thing down.
First of all, I read a few articles how if you actually attempted to create a bomb from liquid, the most you can do would be to blow yourself, not the plane. Next, even if you blow the plane, it is not going to be used as a homing missile, would it? If WWII bombers could not hit a target within miles, you can't hit anything with randomly falling plane. And the last, remember that a derailed train (bomb or not) is always having massive casualties, because that train is not stopping for at least a mile. Anyway, the only thing a plane is better is to fuel hysteria - because of, you know, the narrow space and the pure hight it's flying on. Psychology.
GPLv2: If you modify this work or parts of it and release them, you must release it under GPLv2. GPLv3: If you modify this work or parts of it and release them, you must release it under GPLv3.
Yup, it is so easy to distribute mixed derivative work. Only you have to choose the license very, very carefully.
As, a matter of fact, in GPLv3 there is (going to be) an exception for some licenses just so that they would be compatible. Otherwise... they won't be.
Slashdot Mirror
... but privacy is.
Once a company reaches a certain level of dominance it then takes on additional scrutiny. Google has just about reached a point where it could control the ability for a commercial website to succeed. With that power, practices like changing search results based on how much money they receive could be seen as coercive. It is even more than that. I am sure there are docs and press releases from google inc that search results from google are machine-only, that can be seen as a pledge that they don't mess with them. If they do, that would be false advertisement and punishable by law.
Nuclear and solar power. And wind. Geothermal. Just don't burn the damned oil.
But I suppose ReadyBoost might have a point, dunno. However it's not this one.
If that was it, then the security team has won the game!
Alas... I think it is asking for everything, therefore asking for nothing. An automatic OK is just as bad as no confirmation asked. Even worse, IMHO.
And what if that 5% of the market were the deciding part - like ... a friend asks a geek - which one to choose, NV or ATI? Is he not going to trust the geek?
No doubt about it.
So, there is no problem for Iran to obtain those weapons? After all, there is no danger for civilians whatsoever.
Twist it as you like, but using nukes and protesting against their use is hypocrisy at it's best.
So what? It's me who's dead, remember? Not you, me.
Besides, if his brakes were bad, and I was deaf, or a small child alone, he would have hit me anyway. Even more, if he doesn't drive responsibly (i.e. 50 miles while crossing a walk is NOT acceptable), it is his fault, no matter what I do. In my country, a walk is not required to be marked, but all intersections ARE walks, sans the ones with an underpass. Indeed, it is very hard for the pedestrian to be guilty.
Why the HELL was that modded as troll? He has actually a very good point. Wasn't the annihilation of the native americans a terrorist act or not? If you see the world history, 99% of all freedom fighters could be considered terrorists one way or another. 100 years ago practically nobody would blow stuff on citizens, mainly because there was practically no media coverage of the fact (there was practically no media). A line in a newspaper is far from the impact of a video clip.
I know mods are sometimes scared shitless of terrorists, but I can't understand why you have to mod as a troll everyone that states their very measured opinion, even without saying the names of the countries - namely USA and Israel.
The fact that you could so easily understand who he's talking about gives him even more credit, because if we're measured by our actions, so should be countries.
OTOH, I remember a while ago some US official making remarks on using tactical nuclear devices. I am sure they are not as dangerous as the rest of the arsenal, but "HOW DARE THEY SPEAK AGAINST IRAN, IF THEY ARE EVEN CONSIDERING SUCH A THING AN OPTION???".
Besides, in Iran people from different religions seems to have more freedom than in the rest of the middle east - as in jews can drink wine, which muslims are not allowed. More than that, they are democracy. Iran has such diversity, that it is very hard to rule without cutting somebody's freedom, but they manage just fine. They are one of the oldest civilization, as in more-than-300-years. More like 3000 years. They have a heritage to defend.
Dunno about cryptographers, but Gentoo uses that already. Just see:
* portage-2.1.1.tar.bz2 MD5
* portage-2.1.1.tar.bz2 RMD160
* portage-2.1.1.tar.bz2 SHA1
* portage-2.1.1.tar.bz2 SHA256
* portage-2.1.1.tar.bz2 size
By the way, this is not a bad solution, since it uses industrial standards. The problem is that if you can't use this solution: i.e. want to store the hash of a password to check, you can't use this method, as brute forcing will still wield the same result.
Well ... without AI it is just impossible to distinguish between troll and off-topic first posts and on-topic fp-s.\ ... let them do it. Democracy at it's best :).
Besides, if they want to spend their karma this way
I know, I know, we're not talking about the largest market in the world with GDP way over the US. We're talkin' 'bout damned hippies.
(joke)
Did you miss the EC lawsuit agains MS? It is not over yet, and has begun years ago, so your question has already been answered.
I am not sure what to think about this lawsuit against Apple, but if won it would be tremendous success for the EU citizens.
1. And this helps the end user exactly how? :).
2. Go get and try the new Ubuntu, and you'll see you're 6-months old point is too old now.
3. Well... since the 3D desktop is one of the most innovative features in Vista, if it was the state of the art it would be the best your comment could hope for. Since it is not, yes, many operating systems had it years before that.
4. And since it is here, how it is going to help the users exactly? It is a deterioriation of the OS anyway.
5. Yup, but we're talking about paying customers here. Even then, are you're paying for MSDNAA?
6.
7. And this is in favor of why users will switch to Vista? You're parent was about reasons not to switch, you're answer just gives him the best argument in favor
8. Yes, if you are forced to upgrade, you presumably throw the old computer. And acquire a new one. This makes more trash.
The parent was not about "how much ubuntu and linux is general is better than windows", it was about 10 reasons not to switch from xp to vista. If you don't switch, great. If you do have to, just you might consider not getting on the same train again. We're happy you're using windows and you're content with it, just like we're using linux and are content with it.
... in a galaxy far, far away.
From your post, at least.
It is kind of funny, but I am one of the users with most licensed software on my computer. Granted I mainly use Gentoo, I have an XP with paid license on the laptop, and my office is The Open one.
Anyway, I don't believe that people think of themselves as criminals. You must note that LAW makes the criminals, and if the law is such that 90% of the people are, they can overthrow it.
The reality is that even though the law is not in favor of the ordinary bootlegers (read: citizens) on this matter, the lawsuits are so rare and unsuccessful (when not plain stupid), that people mostly just ignore them. And although people infringe copyright frequently, most of them want to stop doing it if they have a chance and money (USA and most of Europe is an exception in the income part, you know).
I am fully for the use of licensed software, because I believe that this would be a big push for open source. However, it is not going to happen anytime soon.
I say... why don't we call it "using freely the idea somebody thought of, in an unlicensed way?". Or "sharing our possesions with friends and strangers"? That'll look much more like the real thing, don't ya think? After all, we're not stealing the physical medium. And EULAs are not valid contracts in half of the world. All I want is to show how easy would be to start (another) flaming war, when the proper rhetoric is used. If you feel that using unlicensed software and art is stealing, so be it, but please, don't try to force your view of the world on the rest of us. And besides, the legal term is more accurate. Just like libre is better suited for GNU than free.
10x :)
I can't understand why I was modded as flaimbait (your GP), when my post was so moderate and I tried to explain what MAD is and how the GGP is wrong. But I suppose there are people that can't read past the first line.
True, but a fake date is not very convinient, is it?
Well, the gadgets should just get smarter.
The only reason Iran and Syria don't overwhelm Israel is because they would surely be destroyed by Israel's nuclear weapons. The reason Iran and Syria would want nuclear weapons is not so they can immediately launch them at Israel, but so that they can create a situation of mutually assured destruction and then wage conventional warfare (which they have much better odds of winning).
Please, tell me where you got the crack you're smoking.
First of all, Iran does not want Israel to exist, but half of the world don't want USA to exist. So what? Did someone launch a nuke to destroy you? Later, a conventional warfare cannot happen if nukes exist on both sides, because the looser will launch them in the prospect of losing. Therefore, Iran (I don't know about Syria) wants them for their own protection, so Israel would not start another week war, escalate the middle-east problem (them) just for the sake of it. And last, Israel with proven no nukes will likely not be attacked with conventional weapons. Anyway, why do you protect a country based on terror against the native palestinians?
Because a passenger airplane can be used as a cruise missile. While I'm sure it can be done, it's a lot harder to take out a building in a densely populated urban area with a train. Also, the kind of explosion one can create with carry-on luggage liquids probably won't kill many people on a train. At best, it would probably only take out that particular car. On a plane, you don't need that large of an explosion to bring the whole thing down.
First of all, I read a few articles how if you actually attempted to create a bomb from liquid, the most you can do would be to blow yourself, not the plane. Next, even if you blow the plane, it is not going to be used as a homing missile, would it? If WWII bombers could not hit a target within miles, you can't hit anything with randomly falling plane. And the last, remember that a derailed train (bomb or not) is always having massive casualties, because that train is not stopping for at least a mile. Anyway, the only thing a plane is better is to fuel hysteria - because of, you know, the narrow space and the pure hight it's flying on. Psychology.
GPLv2: If you modify this work or parts of it and release them, you must release it under GPLv2.
... they won't be.
GPLv3: If you modify this work or parts of it and release them, you must release it under GPLv3.
Yup, it is so easy to distribute mixed derivative work. Only you have to choose the license very, very carefully.
As, a matter of fact, in GPLv3 there is (going to be) an exception for some licenses just so that they would be compatible. Otherwise