When the system for legislation gets so confusing that not even the people passing the bills can keep it straight, I think it shows that there is some fundamental flaw in the system, or it didn't scale well or something.
When some programmer renames a file in your source control system, then replaces the contents of the file with something completely different, do you blame the programmer or the source control system?
How about we solve our problems here on Earth before attempting to export them into insanely expensive and hostile environments?
Because there will always be another problem to solve. Waiting until everything is perfect here on Earth is equivalent to saying that we're never going to try.
Android is not truly open source. Most android phones are locked down and cannot be modified by the user thanks to tivo-ization.
The phones are locked down, not Android. You can download the source code for the kernel, the virtual machine, and the Java frameworks, and do just about anything you want with them.
You don't just learn social skills by interacting with others. Talking through a problem with someone else is often far more effective than trying to solve it on your own. Something you say may trigger an idea in the other person, which then triggers another idea in you, and so on.
We are only reaching these fundamental limits because most research facilities insist on using a closed source, proprietary universe. If these organisations were to use an open source universe, then people could inspect the source code of the universe and make it better so that scientists could make more discoveries more quickly and overcome these 'fundamental' barriers.
Fixed that for you.
Yeah, I know, it's not that good, but give me a break, it's still early.
Just that the statement that Facebook changed their chat system to XMPP is inaccurate. The underlying system hasn't changed, there's just an XMPP wrapper. For a lot of people, the distinction won't matter, but around Slashdot, some people might have certain expectations of XMPP that Facebook's gateway won't support.
You mean like how it already it is? I read the summary as "we're going to start using a newer version of OpenGL than we use now for compositing", not "you must have an expensive video card that can handle Crysis to run KDE".
The only change to their chat system was adding a layer that converts between XMPP and the system they had before (and still have). If you use only the web interface, there is no XMPP involved at all. The core of the service is still their own chat system, not an XMPP server.
Facebook have since changed their chat to use XMPP
No, they didn't change their IM system, they only added an XMPP gateway that you can use. The easiest thing to notice is the latency in people going online and offline.
Before the XMPP gateway, IM programs simply replicated the HTTP requests that the web chat uses.
I'm a bit out of date on the nuts and bolts, mainly because I'm not in web development, but my guess is that they can only track hover actions not raw mouse data.
There's also the onmousemove event, which provides the coordinates of the mouse. While you're on a page with the JavaScript (and don't have JavaScript blocked or disabled), they can track the position of the mouse relatively to the browser window.
I don't know how this stuff works legally but in my opinion, Apple owns or at least is associated with damn near everything that has the iFormat naming style.
Fortunately, your opinion is not how trademark law works. The iPood has nothing to do with computer technology, and therefore is in an entirely different trade (as in trademark). The typical person would not be confused and think that the iPood is a music player made by Apple.
Hire the top 3 as temporary employees to see how they fit with your company then after a few months let 2 of them go and keep the best.
As other people have said, I doubt many good programmers would be willing to do what basically amounts to a reality show, where you compete against other people for months for some "great" job. A slight tweak to that strategy works much better: change the 3 to 1, then after a few months, either make them permanent or let them go. If you do it that way, the employee knows that they'll get a permanent job if they do the work well, and the company knows that the employee will take the permanent job if they enjoy the work and the environment. It's far more stressful and difficult if the employee has to worry about not just doing the job, but doing the job better (for some definition of better) than the other people they're working with. Besides that, they all have to keep trying to find a job, since there's a >50% chance that they'll be out of work again after a couple months. That's bad for the employer, too, since you have to again deal with making a job offer to a candidate that turns it down because they've accepted an offer from somewhere else.
Don't have to copy code; simply copying the design too much might be enough to trigger it.
Not for copyright of software. Obviously you can't use anything that's trademarked, and it's possible to have design patents, though I don't know if Microsoft has any for Office.
The images used for copy/paste and such, for example.
Sure, if you extract the images, take a screenshot of them, or otherwise actually copy them. Creating your own icons that look similar can't be a copyright violation, since copyright is on a specific expression/implementation, not a general concept.
Get OpenOffice or other software too close to 'Microsoft Office' and you'll likely be treading into copyright violation zone.
I can only speak from the point of view of the U.S., but that's completely wrong. No matter how much functionality you duplicate, unless you actually copy the code from Microsoft Office (i.e. you don't write it yourself), there is no copyright violation.
but if someone happens to be running a botnet (intentionally or not), you're ok with having them filtered.
The person that you replied to didn't say they should be filtered, but should have their service terminated entirely until they can fix their computer. Just like how you're free to listen to whatever music you want to inside your home, but if your stereo is broken so that it plays music at full volume and can't be turned off and it's keeping your neighbors awake at night, the police can come and take away your broken stereo.
Being an aggressive incompassionate sociopath lands you a career in management.
That's true, but using physical force to solve problems with other people is generally not acceptable in most businesses. If you can abandon the physical bullying and learn the mental and emotional bullying, as well as learn how to suck up to your own bosses, then you have brilliant future in management.
Check the regular retail prices of those phones. When I went to the mall kiosk to switch my service to T-Mobile, they had the retail prices for Android phones on the tags, and they were around $450. I believe the regular retail price for the iPhone is at least $600. I paid $550 for my N900 on Newegg, and I believe it's down to $500 now. With T-Mobile, service without a subsidized phone is $20/month cheaper, so if I keep my N900 for exactly two years, I'll have effectively paid $70 for it, which is cheaper than typical subsidized phones that are less capable.
in the long run are you doing anything more than ensuring that the remaining 10% become the entire body of the disease?
The implication of that statement is that this treatment isn't doing anything besides ensuring that the surviving population of the virus is immune to the treatment. However, it's also saving a lot of lives in the meantime. You may not have meant it that way (and I don't think you did), but the way you worded it, I can see how someone might think you did. I think it was just slightly poor phrasing on your part.
I would guess that most people do it for the chance to get more money in later years. The success of B5 has helped him sell more scripts, especially in the past few years, and he certainly deserves the money and success. Of course, that still doesn't excuse the cheating bastards that can turn a billion dollars into zero profit with just a pencil and paper.
I claim that natural intelligence will do. In particular, I am talking about writing a fully customized parser to run against that specific patent document, not anything that at all general. A single-purpose language that will only parse that document or tiny variations thereof. Such a parser does define a language, and by existing makes the patent in violation of itself.
If you can pull that off without having to write substantial amounts of implementing code yourself, I would be very impressed. Just like a patent on a machine doesn't describe the exact location of every nail, a software patent doesn't have to include implementation details that a person of ordinary skill would know how to do. You would have to write a parser that can translate something like "send said data to said second computer" into code that opens a connection, encodes the data, and sends it. And that's an extremely simple example. Also, if you have to write a parser that only works for a single patent, you can't argue that your intent was anything other than implementing the patent.
Slashdot Mirror
I'm pretty sure that lobbyists always come up with a clever name for the legislation that they write, so you can't blame them for this one.
When the system for legislation gets so confusing that not even the people passing the bills can keep it straight, I think it shows that there is some fundamental flaw in the system, or it didn't scale well or something.
When some programmer renames a file in your source control system, then replaces the contents of the file with something completely different, do you blame the programmer or the source control system?
How about we solve our problems here on Earth before attempting to export them into insanely expensive and hostile environments?
Because there will always be another problem to solve. Waiting until everything is perfect here on Earth is equivalent to saying that we're never going to try.
Android is not truly open source. Most android phones are locked down and cannot be modified by the user thanks to tivo-ization.
The phones are locked down, not Android. You can download the source code for the kernel, the virtual machine, and the Java frameworks, and do just about anything you want with them.
GPL 2?
Apache license, actually.
You don't just learn social skills by interacting with others. Talking through a problem with someone else is often far more effective than trying to solve it on your own. Something you say may trigger an idea in the other person, which then triggers another idea in you, and so on.
"Realized" means, his lawyers told him, "You're fucked."
Isn't that why he's in trouble in the first place?
There are as yet no malicious attacks that make use of this attack vector.
That we know about.
We are only reaching these fundamental limits because most research facilities insist on using a closed source, proprietary universe. If these organisations were to use an open source universe, then people could inspect the source code of the universe and make it better so that scientists could make more discoveries more quickly and overcome these 'fundamental' barriers.
Fixed that for you.
Yeah, I know, it's not that good, but give me a break, it's still early.
Just that the statement that Facebook changed their chat system to XMPP is inaccurate. The underlying system hasn't changed, there's just an XMPP wrapper. For a lot of people, the distinction won't matter, but around Slashdot, some people might have certain expectations of XMPP that Facebook's gateway won't support.
You mean like how it already it is? I read the summary as "we're going to start using a newer version of OpenGL than we use now for compositing", not "you must have an expensive video card that can handle Crysis to run KDE".
The only change to their chat system was adding a layer that converts between XMPP and the system they had before (and still have). If you use only the web interface, there is no XMPP involved at all. The core of the service is still their own chat system, not an XMPP server.
Facebook have since changed their chat to use XMPP
No, they didn't change their IM system, they only added an XMPP gateway that you can use. The easiest thing to notice is the latency in people going online and offline.
Before the XMPP gateway, IM programs simply replicated the HTTP requests that the web chat uses.
I'm a bit out of date on the nuts and bolts, mainly because I'm not in web development, but my guess is that they can only track hover actions not raw mouse data.
There's also the onmousemove event, which provides the coordinates of the mouse. While you're on a page with the JavaScript (and don't have JavaScript blocked or disabled), they can track the position of the mouse relatively to the browser window.
I don't know how this stuff works legally but in my opinion, Apple owns or at least is associated with damn near everything that has the iFormat naming style.
Fortunately, your opinion is not how trademark law works. The iPood has nothing to do with computer technology, and therefore is in an entirely different trade (as in trademark). The typical person would not be confused and think that the iPood is a music player made by Apple.
Hire the top 3 as temporary employees to see how they fit with your company then after a few months let 2 of them go and keep the best.
As other people have said, I doubt many good programmers would be willing to do what basically amounts to a reality show, where you compete against other people for months for some "great" job. A slight tweak to that strategy works much better: change the 3 to 1, then after a few months, either make them permanent or let them go. If you do it that way, the employee knows that they'll get a permanent job if they do the work well, and the company knows that the employee will take the permanent job if they enjoy the work and the environment. It's far more stressful and difficult if the employee has to worry about not just doing the job, but doing the job better (for some definition of better) than the other people they're working with. Besides that, they all have to keep trying to find a job, since there's a >50% chance that they'll be out of work again after a couple months. That's bad for the employer, too, since you have to again deal with making a job offer to a candidate that turns it down because they've accepted an offer from somewhere else.
Don't have to copy code; simply copying the design too much might be enough to trigger it.
Not for copyright of software. Obviously you can't use anything that's trademarked, and it's possible to have design patents, though I don't know if Microsoft has any for Office.
The images used for copy/paste and such, for example.
Sure, if you extract the images, take a screenshot of them, or otherwise actually copy them. Creating your own icons that look similar can't be a copyright violation, since copyright is on a specific expression/implementation, not a general concept.
Get OpenOffice or other software too close to 'Microsoft Office' and you'll likely be treading into copyright violation zone.
I can only speak from the point of view of the U.S., but that's completely wrong. No matter how much functionality you duplicate, unless you actually copy the code from Microsoft Office (i.e. you don't write it yourself), there is no copyright violation.
but if someone happens to be running a botnet (intentionally or not), you're ok with having them filtered.
The person that you replied to didn't say they should be filtered, but should have their service terminated entirely until they can fix their computer. Just like how you're free to listen to whatever music you want to inside your home, but if your stereo is broken so that it plays music at full volume and can't be turned off and it's keeping your neighbors awake at night, the police can come and take away your broken stereo.
Being an aggressive incompassionate sociopath lands you a career in management.
That's true, but using physical force to solve problems with other people is generally not acceptable in most businesses. If you can abandon the physical bullying and learn the mental and emotional bullying, as well as learn how to suck up to your own bosses, then you have brilliant future in management.
The story summary should be accurate/informative enough to allow one to base an opinion off of.
Hahahahahahahaha
That's the funniest thing I've read in weeks.
Check the regular retail prices of those phones. When I went to the mall kiosk to switch my service to T-Mobile, they had the retail prices for Android phones on the tags, and they were around $450. I believe the regular retail price for the iPhone is at least $600. I paid $550 for my N900 on Newegg, and I believe it's down to $500 now. With T-Mobile, service without a subsidized phone is $20/month cheaper, so if I keep my N900 for exactly two years, I'll have effectively paid $70 for it, which is cheaper than typical subsidized phones that are less capable.
in the long run are you doing anything more than ensuring that the remaining 10% become the entire body of the disease?
The implication of that statement is that this treatment isn't doing anything besides ensuring that the surviving population of the virus is immune to the treatment. However, it's also saving a lot of lives in the meantime. You may not have meant it that way (and I don't think you did), but the way you worded it, I can see how someone might think you did. I think it was just slightly poor phrasing on your part.
I would guess that most people do it for the chance to get more money in later years. The success of B5 has helped him sell more scripts, especially in the past few years, and he certainly deserves the money and success. Of course, that still doesn't excuse the cheating bastards that can turn a billion dollars into zero profit with just a pencil and paper.
Off topic but I love the B5 quote. ~Z
I'm guessing it's because JMS has been pretty outspoken about what Hollywood Accounting has done to B5.
I claim that natural intelligence will do. In particular, I am talking about writing a fully customized parser to run against that specific patent document, not anything that at all general. A single-purpose language that will only parse that document or tiny variations thereof. Such a parser does define a language, and by existing makes the patent in violation of itself.
If you can pull that off without having to write substantial amounts of implementing code yourself, I would be very impressed. Just like a patent on a machine doesn't describe the exact location of every nail, a software patent doesn't have to include implementation details that a person of ordinary skill would know how to do. You would have to write a parser that can translate something like "send said data to said second computer" into code that opens a connection, encodes the data, and sends it. And that's an extremely simple example. Also, if you have to write a parser that only works for a single patent, you can't argue that your intent was anything other than implementing the patent.