I'd have agreed with you yesterday, but these improvements could change that. Something to consider. Kind of like the time (back in 98, I think) I realized my application ran faster in floating point than in fixed point, changes to the infrastructure can change the way you approach problems.
Hmm, I was going to ask about ehci drivers for linux, but I found the answer via google:
Q: Does Linux talk to USB 2.0 devices?
A: Yes, in two ways. First the backward-compatible way: all high speed (480 Mbit/sec) devices can be used at full speed (12 Mbit/sec) in all current Linux kernels. Second if you have the EHCI driver, and a USB 2.0 host controller (EHCI, currently available as add-on PCI cards) then you can use these devices at high speed. EHCI support is available in the Linux 2.5 development kernels, and also in 2.4.19 kernels. (The 2.4.19 code should handle USB disks nicely, but for more complete USB 2.0 support, use 2.5 instead.) At this writing the EHCI driver is labeled "experimental".
Even evil empire as we called it does repect their developers ("Developer! Developer! Developer!").
I'm guessing you mean Microsoft here? Do you think, in the same situation, that MS would give the guy $2B. Do you think they would give him $162 dollars?
Personally, I don't. Then again, I don't sympathise with this guy very much. I don't work for places that don't allow me to retain my ideas in some fashion (my current workplace requires I document them and work on them on my spare time with my own equipment. my previous employer owned rights in the medical vertical market only unless an exception was approved, which I was fine with). My understanding of the MS employee agreement is that it is not liberal enough for me to work there (though it is just hearsay).
It really depends on why the company was barely staying afloat. If it was because they didn't have revenue, then that's one thing. If it's because they are paying 2+ mil/year to the CEO, then thats another.
Note, I am all for CEOs getting a lot of money (I think bonuses to a that high of a base salary is better) when they are doing the right things for the company, but there also has to be balence between what they get and what the people under them get.
One unfortunate thing I've found, however, is that boards of directors often don't really care if the bonuses get to the people they don't know, when really they should since it does affect their investment. Oh well.
I'm not kidding. I used to weigh 105ish, and had a more extensive workout program than yours (arms, legs, chest, shoulders, and back with at least different 3 excercises for each group plus cardio) and didn't gain (no weight, no muscle, nothing). Even when I stopped because of life changes, I didn't gain or lose or anything. About 5 years later (when I was 21) I started gaining weight pretty uncontrollably to 150. I cut back on what I ate and dropped back to 130. Now I'm doing the work out again (for about 7 months) and I'm at 140 and there is a noticable difference in my physique.
The problem is that you have to drink even more water than you would to remain unthirsty. You have to force yourself to drink a lot of water. There are more reasons than then that kidney stones.
- Animal protein makes urine more acidic, which can eventually lead to kidney failure
- Protein leaches calcium from your body. This is one of the reasons why milk can be bad for you: if you aren't geting enough magnesium to be able to process the calcium from milk into bone, then the protein will actually remove calcium from you body. Note: it is the calcium excreted via your urine that forms the kidney stones the parent talks about.
One thing I will say about this is that these "facts" are under debate w.r.t. humans. When dealing with other species these problems are very well documented by species (iguanas cannot have any animal protein in their diet because of kindey failure, dogs should eat mostly slightly decomposed meat with some vegetables, ferrets should only eat meat), but humans are harder to experiment with than animals. Still, IMO, the evidence falls more on this side than the "high protein is okay" side.
Language is meant to do one thing and one thing only: Allow communications
Says who? People can use language for whatever they want. Language is often used to be exclusive as well as inclusive. While I agree that these kids should have big red circles on their papers, if they want to come up with (or repeat) new(ish, little about these spellings was new when I was on BBSs in the early 90s) ways of typing words, more power to 'em.
I think the problem is that these devices, while including WEP, will probably also include some other security "standard". At first the WEP stuff may be easy to use (along with the PEAP stuff), but MS will judge how well it can nudge people toward PEAP as time goes on, making it the default, etc etc.
Also, if they do make a "winmodem" style adapter, then that also ties into the monopoly more. I wouldn't mind any of this is the standards were open and freely implementable at the OS level (like any other hardware company would do), but these devices can work as a monopoly protector.
It is something to consider. I already own 802.11b hardware, so it's not a big issue for me.
If I point my web browser at a web site and it returns a page with no authorization request, have I illegally accessed that site? If send subsequent requests to the site and it sends back more documents, am I illegally using their bandwidth?
If I ftp to a site, and without seeing a message from the site other than "connected" use "ftp/my@email.adr" to log on, have I illegally accessed the site? If I cd around and pull/push a few files, have I illegally used their bandwidth?
If I scan for a WAP, and I get connected, have I illegally accessed the WAP? If I then request the WAP to pass on my packets and relay my packets back to me, have I illegally used their bandwidth?
Sitting any distance away and listening to the music that drifts out from an outdoor (or indoor) concert takes nothing from the promoters, the band, nor the paying audience.
Do know of case law that backs this up. I've heard both that you are not allowed to enter an unlocked house and that you are allowed to enter an unlocked house. I haven't been able to find any caselaw either way (findlaw's search engine blows about as bad as/.s).
My understanding is that stealing cable isn't theft by law, but instead falls under a different statute that defines what stealing cable is and what the penalties are (actually, much higher than regular theft, IIRC)
From this cursory look, it seems like you are not actually a conservative but are a libertarian. You can take this test to see.
Re:Good for linux(?), probably not good for Sun
on
Sun To Sell Linux PCs
·
· Score: 1
I also read that article and at the time agreed with it but now sort of disagree. The fact is that they can't just ignore MS. As more and more software gets released for that platform, more and more customers will go to it. I could understand MS not liking Java comoditising the operating system because they gain by the status quo.
Sun has been doing things to try to make itself the viable choice in a commodity market. They market towards TCO in large businesses, with SunRays and minimizing administration, but businesses aren't going to use Sun hardware regardless of lower TCO if they don't have the software they want.
Nimda and whatever Unix-attack-of-the-day-due-to-careless-admins occurs.
To be fair, according to the link, it took 3 days, not one, before the slapper virus was removed from it's network (it just shows how many hosts were on the p2p network it was setting, up, there may still be infected hosts out there that have been blocked from the network (by a firewall, for example).
I'm guessing you didn't want that space in the string as well. It's put there to prevent widening the page (which makes it very annoying to read as you have to scroll back and forth).
Actually, the parent poster is more correct. Watch:
There are 100K legal copies of the game, and 60% of the users (legal or not) get the expansion, then you would expect only 60K would have bought the expansion. But because they had troubles pirating, 150K bought the expansion, you can then work backwards from this 150K as the set of people who legally bought it and illegally pirated it but were unable to pirate the expansion so bought it anyway. That gives you the 250K people who would have paid.
Now, there is probably an even larger set of people who illegally pirated the software but wouldn't pay for it if they had troubles getting it, but they aren't represented in the figures because they never bought anything and so are invisible to us (there could be a hundred million of them, for all we know).
Now, there are a few flaws with this. For example, the expansion probably cost less, so more people are willing to buy it (thus they would have never paid for the first release of the game). Also, some people may have had piraters guilt and felt buying the expansion was a good compromise (also, thus not paying for the game). Lastly, but probably most importantly, there are people who wouldn't have played the game at all if they had to pay and thus wouldn't have known they liked it enough to want the expansion (again not increasing the game). When considering these flaws, it supports your argument more since in actuallity the total at the end would have been less.
Hmmm, I think the only thing I've learned here is that if I'm making a game I should consider releasing the first one as easily copyable and the expansion pack with extra hard copy protection.
There are many other benefits to an individual company, though, such as maintaining marketshare and word-of-mouth promotion, but that leads into one of the other crimes of copyright infringment: if I pirate a copy of PhotoShop, when I would have paid $99 for Paint Shop Pro, then Adobe gains, and Jasc loses.
Slashdot Mirror
I'd have agreed with you yesterday, but these improvements could change that. Something to consider. Kind of like the time (back in 98, I think) I realized my application ran faster in floating point than in fixed point, changes to the infrastructure can change the way you approach problems.
Hmm, I was going to ask about ehci drivers for linux, but I found the answer via google:
Q: Does Linux talk to USB 2.0 devices?
A: Yes, in two ways. First the backward-compatible way: all high speed (480 Mbit/sec) devices can be used at full speed (12 Mbit/sec) in all current Linux kernels. Second if you have the EHCI driver, and a USB 2.0 host controller (EHCI, currently available as add-on PCI cards) then you can use these devices at high speed. EHCI support is available in the Linux 2.5 development kernels, and also in 2.4.19 kernels. (The 2.4.19 code should handle USB disks nicely, but for more complete USB 2.0 support, use 2.5 instead.) At this writing the EHCI driver is labeled "experimental".
Even evil empire as we called it does repect their developers ("Developer! Developer! Developer!").
I'm guessing you mean Microsoft here? Do you think, in the same situation, that MS would give the guy $2B. Do you think they would give him $162 dollars?
Personally, I don't. Then again, I don't sympathise with this guy very much. I don't work for places that don't allow me to retain my ideas in some fashion (my current workplace requires I document them and work on them on my spare time with my own equipment. my previous employer owned rights in the medical vertical market only unless an exception was approved, which I was fine with). My understanding of the MS employee agreement is that it is not liberal enough for me to work there (though it is just hearsay).
It really depends on why the company was barely staying afloat. If it was because they didn't have revenue, then that's one thing. If it's because they are paying 2+ mil/year to the CEO, then thats another.
Note, I am all for CEOs getting a lot of money (I think bonuses to a that high of a base salary is better) when they are doing the right things for the company, but there also has to be balence between what they get and what the people under them get.
One unfortunate thing I've found, however, is that boards of directors often don't really care if the bonuses get to the people they don't know, when really they should since it does affect their investment. Oh well.
Wait 5-10 years.
I'm not kidding. I used to weigh 105ish, and had a more extensive workout program than yours (arms, legs, chest, shoulders, and back with at least different 3 excercises for each group plus cardio) and didn't gain (no weight, no muscle, nothing). Even when I stopped because of life changes, I didn't gain or lose or anything. About 5 years later (when I was 21) I started gaining weight pretty uncontrollably to 150. I cut back on what I ate and dropped back to 130. Now I'm doing the work out again (for about 7 months) and I'm at 140 and there is a noticable difference in my physique.
The problem is that you have to drink even more water than you would to remain unthirsty. You have to force yourself to drink a lot of water. There are more reasons than then that kidney stones.
- Animal protein makes urine more acidic, which can eventually lead to kidney failure
- Protein leaches calcium from your body. This is one of the reasons why milk can be bad for you: if you aren't geting enough magnesium to be able to process the calcium from milk into bone, then the protein will actually remove calcium from you body. Note: it is the calcium excreted via your urine that forms the kidney stones the parent talks about.
One thing I will say about this is that these "facts" are under debate w.r.t. humans. When dealing with other species these problems are very well documented by species (iguanas cannot have any animal protein in their diet because of kindey failure, dogs should eat mostly slightly decomposed meat with some vegetables, ferrets should only eat meat), but humans are harder to experiment with than animals. Still, IMO, the evidence falls more on this side than the "high protein is okay" side.
Looking at the picture, I thought you were going to talk about something else that would be illegal.
The was very stupid.
It is true:
you only cheated yourself.
Language is meant to do one thing and one thing only: Allow communications
Says who? People can use language for whatever they want. Language is often used to be exclusive as well as inclusive. While I agree that these kids should have big red circles on their papers, if they want to come up with (or repeat) new(ish, little about these spellings was new when I was on BBSs in the early 90s) ways of typing words, more power to 'em.
ur kewl
I think you're right.
I'll ignore your idiotic ability to state the obvious.
I think the problem is that these devices, while including WEP, will probably also include some other security "standard". At first the WEP stuff may be easy to use (along with the PEAP stuff), but MS will judge how well it can nudge people toward PEAP as time goes on, making it the default, etc etc.
Also, if they do make a "winmodem" style adapter, then that also ties into the monopoly more. I wouldn't mind any of this is the standards were open and freely implementable at the OS level (like any other hardware company would do), but these devices can work as a monopoly protector.
It is something to consider. I already own 802.11b hardware, so it's not a big issue for me.
If I point my web browser at a web site and it returns a page with no authorization request, have I illegally accessed that site? If send subsequent requests to the site and it sends back more documents, am I illegally using their bandwidth?
If I ftp to a site, and without seeing a message from the site other than "connected" use "ftp/my@email.adr" to log on, have I illegally accessed the site? If I cd around and pull/push a few files, have I illegally used their bandwidth?
If I scan for a WAP, and I get connected, have I illegally accessed the WAP? If I then request the WAP to pass on my packets and relay my packets back to me, have I illegally used their bandwidth?
Sitting any distance away and listening to the music that drifts out from an outdoor (or indoor) concert takes nothing from the promoters, the band, nor the paying audience.
But Hillary Rosen told me it does.
Do know of case law that backs this up. I've heard both that you are not allowed to enter an unlocked house and that you are allowed to enter an unlocked house. I haven't been able to find any caselaw either way (findlaw's search engine blows about as bad as /.s).
My understanding is that stealing cable isn't theft by law, but instead falls under a different statute that defines what stealing cable is and what the penalties are (actually, much higher than regular theft, IIRC)
DADE:Yeah. It's not just the chip, it has a PCI bus. But you knew that.
KATE: Indeed. RISC architecture is gonna change everything.
How could you not love it.
One thing I've been wondering about anti-matter, does it have anti-gravity, which attracts other anti-matter but repels regular matter?
From this cursory look, it seems like you are not actually a conservative but are a libertarian. You can take this test to see.
I also read that article and at the time agreed with it but now sort of disagree. The fact is that they can't just ignore MS. As more and more software gets released for that platform, more and more customers will go to it. I could understand MS not liking Java comoditising the operating system because they gain by the status quo.
Sun has been doing things to try to make itself the viable choice in a commodity market. They market towards TCO in large businesses, with SunRays and minimizing administration, but businesses aren't going to use Sun hardware regardless of lower TCO if they don't have the software they want.
I had noticed it too. Kinda cute when you think about it.
Nimda and whatever Unix-attack-of-the-day-due-to-careless-admins occurs.
To be fair, according to the link, it took 3 days, not one, before the slapper virus was removed from it's network (it just shows how many hosts were on the p2p network it was setting, up, there may still be infected hosts out there that have been blocked from the network (by a firewall, for example).
I'm guessing you didn't want that space in the string as well. It's put there to prevent widening the page (which makes it very annoying to read as you have to scroll back and forth).
This sounds good to me (at first glance), but I think we'd have to pass an amendment to do this.
Actually, the parent poster is more correct. Watch:
There are 100K legal copies of the game, and 60% of the users (legal or not) get the expansion, then you would expect only 60K would have bought the expansion. But because they had troubles pirating, 150K bought the expansion, you can then work backwards from this 150K as the set of people who legally bought it and illegally pirated it but were unable to pirate the expansion so bought it anyway. That gives you the 250K people who would have paid.
Now, there is probably an even larger set of people who illegally pirated the software but wouldn't pay for it if they had troubles getting it, but they aren't represented in the figures because they never bought anything and so are invisible to us (there could be a hundred million of them, for all we know).
Now, there are a few flaws with this. For example, the expansion probably cost less, so more people are willing to buy it (thus they would have never paid for the first release of the game). Also, some people may have had piraters guilt and felt buying the expansion was a good compromise (also, thus not paying for the game). Lastly, but probably most importantly, there are people who wouldn't have played the game at all if they had to pay and thus wouldn't have known they liked it enough to want the expansion (again not increasing the game). When considering these flaws, it supports your argument more since in actuallity the total at the end would have been less.
Hmmm, I think the only thing I've learned here is that if I'm making a game I should consider releasing the first one as easily copyable and the expansion pack with extra hard copy protection.
There are many other benefits to an individual company, though, such as maintaining marketshare and word-of-mouth promotion, but that leads into one of the other crimes of copyright infringment: if I pirate a copy of PhotoShop, when I would have paid $99 for Paint Shop Pro, then Adobe gains, and Jasc loses.