Gnome 3 is as much the stupidification of the Linux desktop as Metro is to Win8. It always happens when you let the developers make decisions rather than letting consumers have the choice.
What they need is gnome 3 with the gnome 2 interface.
Don't you mean the remaining 75 million? Linux growth continues. There's been no decline in users adopting it, only solid increases. 75-100 million users is a significant market. Stop being a troll and get back into your mom's basement (or rather back under your bridge).
I don't believe he rejected any patents. He only rejected the idea that Apple should be sued by Samsung for the patents in question, rather they should have been negotiating according to their rules.
This doesn't mean Apple gets out from under the suit. It just means more delays. It is likely that Samsung is learning well.
My opinion to date is that Samsung is inept at pursuing their claims. Surely Samsung can get some better lawyers to deal with these issues.
My prediction is that Google will begin suing Microsoft and Apple once they have thorough control of Motorola. Right now Apple and Microsoft have done everything possible to avoid lawsuits with Google directly. That's going to come to an end. Google now has a very strong portfolio and can create havoc especially for Microsoft (a company that tends to loose every battle they face in court).
Google won't sit back any longer and watch Microsoft extort money without disclosing to the world what they are using to extort it with. Right now you have Microsoft refusing to tell the community what is at issue so that they can correct any discrepancies that might occur. They are hiding that while suing others. That is extortion. They won't give the open source community the ability to change things if they are in fact in violation and instead threatens suits unless they cross license, pay money, and invest in their failing phone OS. That frankly could be considered restraint of trade.
I waited in line for a few hours to pick up a $149.99 32gig HP Touchpad. It was worth it. Lots of people envy it (for the price I paid). I have other tablets too and yet I find the Touchpad to be the item that keeps my attention.
What he's doing is being a publicity hound. He could walk into Apple, talk to Tim Cook, and have a box of them placed in his lap. I find these antics humorous and highly manipulative. He's a billionaire. He can fly in private jets anywhere in the world on a moments notice. He can buy some whole towns. Why would a billionaire stand in line all night long to get a cellphone that his company sells?
One final note. Be wary of the practical joker. Those around him should probably get ready to have him buy theirs as well, as a good gesture.
Let's sort of clarify some of this for you guys. Verisign is like a sign company. It simply makes something that identifies you. It doesn't own what is created. For instance, your business name is used as a domain name. Just because VeriSign gives you the domain it doesn't mean that it owns that company name, even within the context of the domain.
If you allowed VeriSign that sort of control it would be like a sign company that made a sign for your business being able to shut down your business because they made the sign.
The only authority they may claim is that they are empowered by the government. If that is the case then they cannot take down a domain without a warrant as the federal government is required to get a warrant to do so (as is being litigated currently with the Rojadirecta case). Being that they are acting as an agent of the government they are bound by the same laws as the federal government, which is restrained by the first amendment. There are plenty of cases that rule that you can't deny free speech rights and that doing so requires very extreme and special circumstance that must be proven first in a court of law with a hearing represented by both parties. On top of that there are plenty of "prior restraint" issues involved along with first amendment free speech issues.
Every government employee or agent of the government that violates someone's constitutional rights (any and all rights) should be charged with a crime. It is that simple. The law covering that should not allow anyone to be shielded by the government nor pardoned by the government. We'd see far fewer issues where corporations collude with the government....
VeriSign, when working in conjunction with the federal government, works as an agent of the government. Hence, denial of their domain would be a denial of their free speech rights which would be a violation of a person's first amendment rights. And it is a first amendment rights violation. Since VeriSign does not own the domain name system nor the certificate system they are working as part of a larger project funded and likely directed by the Federal Government and hence their actions are directly tied to government action thus making them an agent of the government at all times. In fact, our federal government claims clearly that they own the.com and.org top level domains and hence can do what they wish (though that is being tested in court with the Rojadirecta.org domain name seizure).
VeriSign would not have mentioned warrants because no matter what, if they weren't part of the government machine at this point there'd be no question. They could do whatever they wanted as long as they issued it. But technically they didn't issue it. They simply track it and collect funds for it. Because you got your domain through them doesn't mean they own it.
Get it? Understand it? That's how it works. Working as an agent, at the direction of the federal government, they become an agent of the government and therefore are bound by the law, including requiring a warrant.
The answer should be not no, but hell no. We don't need VeriSign. We can find other companies that will do what VeriSign does without violating our First Amendment right to free speech.
We all know Microsoft's response is total bullshit. What this is in response to is that a recent report indicating that IE is the primary vector for infection in Windows environments, which is nearly all of them as the infection rate for other OSes isn't even measurable.
This is a deflection tactic. It is mean to push notice on the competition that is suffering now in the press at various stages. It has no merit, none at all. It is a weak tactic and one we all should despise.
Instead of Microsoft actually fixing their problems, or exiting the market, they have to make others look bad to make themselves look better. I'm sure few of us will take the bait, but when addressing the unwashed masses it has it's intended affect.
Everyone here should be a correction mechanism for this for their family and friends. Microsoft can reach more people with a single utterance than any of us can, but together we can work to ensure we offset that with the real causes of infections (Microsoft's shoddy work), and we can shed light on our family and friends to make it clear that they understand these are shameful tactics.
You could have taken it as a violation of fee speech. Since she was a government employee she violated the Constitution by forcing you to delete the photos. There should be a law that says that when a government employee violates the Constitution it becomes a crime.
It is not illegal. That generally means that it is against the law. The photo taking is not against the law. What they do is stretch other laws to cover it. So, the Mall ownership may say that you can't. But then you do. That means you are in violation of their policy. If they don't like it and you don't stop they tell you to get out. If you don't get out then it becomes trespass.
Using the term illegal means that someone broke a criminal law. Civil law does not cover criminal action.
I am sad. For a short while I sat in silence. My thoughts during the silence were that he accomplished a lot, more than some, less than others, and that we all leave this planet one way or another. His pain is over. He knew his end. May he rest in peace.
It will never happen. Those guys do not understand the U.S. Constitution, if that is their true goal. It would probably be best that the citizens of those states that elected those individuals vote them or impeach them out.
Yes, some older ide drives are like that, especially since the are so old--probably was a drive engineered long before the current technology was developed.
It doesn't mean most ppl will know any of this. And you had the old card to compare with. For someone without access to the old board they'd be lost as to which card from which batch they needed.
If he could kill the motor that too would suffice as you can't replace it. He could just open the drive by removing a couple screws and pour some corrosive fluid on it and let them sit for a while. There are far better and simpler ways than shredding the drive or finding an expensive degausser, especially since they are unreliable at best.
With current drive technology the circuit board must match precisely--to the model and batch. You were probably lucky that he had one from your batch. Recovery houses do the same thing, they have a collection of circuit boards that they use to attempt to access. The data is encoded in the drives with parameters set by the circuit boards, alignment of certain data on the drive must match the info in the circuit boards and the info varies from model to model and batch to batch. You should look up how recovery houses recover data--their techniques. Much is well documented, including the pitfalls. And if he has a mass produced consumer drive you could find a replacement more readily. But the average person trying to get at the data wouldn't know that. They'd encounter a drive without a circuit board and give up.
You are not the average person. Only a complete destruction will keep an expert from gaining access if they so desire. So technically he has only one choice if he wants to protect himself--physical destruction.
Much ado about nothing. Remove the circuit boards. There'll be nigh chance in hell anyone will find a matching board for that model ***and that batch*** in order to get at the data. Toss the drives afterwards. And degaussers are rarely reliable.
There are many android video players. There are streamers, like plex. Mobo player works for most media files except MKV.
Showing us a link to a site that shows a picture of a movie playing isn't the same thing as showing us progress. I'm not dumping on this guys accomplishment but whoever decided to stick a picture (a sole image) of a screen snapshot to demonstrate progress in video on Android is a bit in outer space.
Show us an mkv file playing on that device with audio in sync and I'll say we have progress.
That's too freaking generic. You can't patent the modularization of hardware or software. Cars are modularized, computers are already modularized. This is stupidity. So, Microsoft is what "filing first" for every freaking idea while understanding that they can modify later when/if they are rejected?
They are all bits. If the networks won't scale up we shouldnt be expected to view them in some special way. They are lazy sobs that won't invest and chose to squeeze us instead.
I wasn't saying that it was object linking and embedding. I was joshing. I doubt anyone will use that tech anyway except maybe Microsoft. People are weary of lock in technologies.
Slashdot Mirror
You must be very ill informed. There are between 75 and 100 million people using Linux world-wide. Go back to your bridge troll.
Gnome 3 is as much the stupidification of the Linux desktop as Metro is to Win8. It always happens when you let the developers make decisions rather than letting consumers have the choice.
What they need is gnome 3 with the gnome 2 interface.
Don't you mean the remaining 75 million? Linux growth continues. There's been no decline in users adopting it, only solid increases. 75-100 million users is a significant market. Stop being a troll and get back into your mom's basement (or rather back under your bridge).
What Happens When the Average Lifespan is 150 Years?
You realize you are living on another planet in another universe and go about your way.
I don't believe he rejected any patents. He only rejected the idea that Apple should be sued by Samsung for the patents in question, rather they should have been negotiating according to their rules.
This doesn't mean Apple gets out from under the suit. It just means more delays. It is likely that Samsung is learning well.
My opinion to date is that Samsung is inept at pursuing their claims. Surely Samsung can get some better lawyers to deal with these issues.
My prediction is that Google will begin suing Microsoft and Apple once they have thorough control of Motorola. Right now Apple and Microsoft have done everything possible to avoid lawsuits with Google directly. That's going to come to an end. Google now has a very strong portfolio and can create havoc especially for Microsoft (a company that tends to loose every battle they face in court).
Google won't sit back any longer and watch Microsoft extort money without disclosing to the world what they are using to extort it with. Right now you have Microsoft refusing to tell the community what is at issue so that they can correct any discrepancies that might occur. They are hiding that while suing others. That is extortion. They won't give the open source community the ability to change things if they are in fact in violation and instead threatens suits unless they cross license, pay money, and invest in their failing phone OS. That frankly could be considered restraint of trade.
I waited in line for a few hours to pick up a $149.99 32gig HP Touchpad. It was worth it. Lots of people envy it (for the price I paid). I have other tablets too and yet I find the Touchpad to be the item that keeps my attention.
What he's doing is being a publicity hound. He could walk into Apple, talk to Tim Cook, and have a box of them placed in his lap. I find these antics humorous and highly manipulative. He's a billionaire. He can fly in private jets anywhere in the world on a moments notice. He can buy some whole towns. Why would a billionaire stand in line all night long to get a cellphone that his company sells?
One final note. Be wary of the practical joker. Those around him should probably get ready to have him buy theirs as well, as a good gesture.
Yes, Woz, we'll miss you too.
Let's sort of clarify some of this for you guys. Verisign is like a sign company. It simply makes something that identifies you. It doesn't own what is created. For instance, your business name is used as a domain name. Just because VeriSign gives you the domain it doesn't mean that it owns that company name, even within the context of the domain.
If you allowed VeriSign that sort of control it would be like a sign company that made a sign for your business being able to shut down your business because they made the sign.
The only authority they may claim is that they are empowered by the government. If that is the case then they cannot take down a domain without a warrant as the federal government is required to get a warrant to do so (as is being litigated currently with the Rojadirecta case). Being that they are acting as an agent of the government they are bound by the same laws as the federal government, which is restrained by the first amendment. There are plenty of cases that rule that you can't deny free speech rights and that doing so requires very extreme and special circumstance that must be proven first in a court of law with a hearing represented by both parties. On top of that there are plenty of "prior restraint" issues involved along with first amendment free speech issues.
VeriSign's desire is a non-starter.
Every government employee or agent of the government that violates someone's constitutional rights (any and all rights) should be charged with a crime. It is that simple. The law covering that should not allow anyone to be shielded by the government nor pardoned by the government. We'd see far fewer issues where corporations collude with the government....
as clearly is the case with VeriSign today.
VeriSign, when working in conjunction with the federal government, works as an agent of the government. Hence, denial of their domain would be a denial of their free speech rights which would be a violation of a person's first amendment rights. And it is a first amendment rights violation. Since VeriSign does not own the domain name system nor the certificate system they are working as part of a larger project funded and likely directed by the Federal Government and hence their actions are directly tied to government action thus making them an agent of the government at all times. In fact, our federal government claims clearly that they own the .com and .org top level domains and hence can do what they wish (though that is being tested in court with the Rojadirecta.org domain name seizure).
VeriSign would not have mentioned warrants because no matter what, if they weren't part of the government machine at this point there'd be no question. They could do whatever they wanted as long as they issued it. But technically they didn't issue it. They simply track it and collect funds for it. Because you got your domain through them doesn't mean they own it.
Get it? Understand it? That's how it works. Working as an agent, at the direction of the federal government, they become an agent of the government and therefore are bound by the law, including requiring a warrant.
The answer should be not no, but hell no. We don't need VeriSign. We can find other companies that will do what VeriSign does without violating our First Amendment right to free speech.
We all know Microsoft's response is total bullshit. What this is in response to is that a recent report indicating that IE is the primary vector for infection in Windows environments, which is nearly all of them as the infection rate for other OSes isn't even measurable.
This is a deflection tactic. It is mean to push notice on the competition that is suffering now in the press at various stages. It has no merit, none at all. It is a weak tactic and one we all should despise.
Instead of Microsoft actually fixing their problems, or exiting the market, they have to make others look bad to make themselves look better. I'm sure few of us will take the bait, but when addressing the unwashed masses it has it's intended affect.
Everyone here should be a correction mechanism for this for their family and friends. Microsoft can reach more people with a single utterance than any of us can, but together we can work to ensure we offset that with the real causes of infections (Microsoft's shoddy work), and we can shed light on our family and friends to make it clear that they understand these are shameful tactics.
You could have taken it as a violation of fee speech. Since she was a government employee she violated the Constitution by forcing you to delete the photos. There should be a law that says that when a government employee violates the Constitution it becomes a crime.
It is not illegal. That generally means that it is against the law. The photo taking is not against the law. What they do is stretch other laws to cover it. So, the Mall ownership may say that you can't. But then you do. That means you are in violation of their policy. If they don't like it and you don't stop they tell you to get out. If you don't get out then it becomes trespass.
Using the term illegal means that someone broke a criminal law. Civil law does not cover criminal action.
I am sad. For a short while I sat in silence. My thoughts during the silence were that he accomplished a lot, more than some, less than others, and that we all leave this planet one way or another. His pain is over. He knew his end. May he rest in peace.
Microsoft hasn't a fucking clue. They either don't get out of their own offices or they don't use their own product.
It will never happen. Those guys do not understand the U.S. Constitution, if that is their true goal. It would probably be best that the citizens of those states that elected those individuals vote them or impeach them out.
Can we move past these incompetent goofballs?
Yes, some older ide drives are like that, especially since the are so old--probably was a drive engineered long before the current technology was developed.
It doesn't mean most ppl will know any of this. And you had the old card to compare with. For someone without access to the old board they'd be lost as to which card from which batch they needed.
If he could kill the motor that too would suffice as you can't replace it. He could just open the drive by removing a couple screws and pour some corrosive fluid on it and let them sit for a while. There are far better and simpler ways than shredding the drive or finding an expensive degausser, especially since they are unreliable at best.
With current drive technology the circuit board must match precisely--to the model and batch. You were probably lucky that he had one from your batch. Recovery houses do the same thing, they have a collection of circuit boards that they use to attempt to access. The data is encoded in the drives with parameters set by the circuit boards, alignment of certain data on the drive must match the info in the circuit boards and the info varies from model to model and batch to batch. You should look up how recovery houses recover data--their techniques. Much is well documented, including the pitfalls. And if he has a mass produced consumer drive you could find a replacement more readily. But the average person trying to get at the data wouldn't know that. They'd encounter a drive without a circuit board and give up.
You are not the average person. Only a complete destruction will keep an expert from gaining access if they so desire. So technically he has only one choice if he wants to protect himself--physical destruction.
Much ado about nothing. Remove the circuit boards. There'll be nigh chance in hell anyone will find a matching board for that model ***and that batch*** in order to get at the data. Toss the drives afterwards. And degaussers are rarely reliable.
There are many android video players. There are streamers, like plex. Mobo player works for most media files except MKV.
Showing us a link to a site that shows a picture of a movie playing isn't the same thing as showing us progress. I'm not dumping on this guys accomplishment but whoever decided to stick a picture (a sole image) of a screen snapshot to demonstrate progress in video on Android is a bit in outer space.
Show us an mkv file playing on that device with audio in sync and I'll say we have progress.
That's too freaking generic. You can't patent the modularization of hardware or software. Cars are modularized, computers are already modularized. This is stupidity. So, Microsoft is what "filing first" for every freaking idea while understanding that they can modify later when/if they are rejected?
Utterly moronic.
This guy is an utter fucktard.
They are all bits. If the networks won't scale up we shouldnt be expected to view them in some special way. They are lazy sobs that won't invest and chose to squeeze us instead.
I wasn't saying that it was object linking and embedding. I was joshing. I doubt anyone will use that tech anyway except maybe Microsoft. People are weary of lock in technologies.
It's called "the clipboard". OLE!