Whereas we know, despite millennia of attempts, no such standardization is possible, except in very small groups over a very specialized range of concepts.
Alice laughed: "There's no use trying," she said; "one can't believe impossible things."
"I daresay you haven't had much practice," said the Queen. "When I was younger, I always did it for half an hour a day. Why, sometimes I've believed as many as six impossible things before breakfast."
Dell's strategy is to make the cheapest PC's around to bring in customers, then make it as easy as possible to spend more than that. They are not the Wal-Mart of computing.
That's exactly Walmarts strategy:
Have the least expensive item in a category to draw in customers.
Charge more for all the other items in that category. (More relative to Target, etc...)
...within multiple browsers and operating systems (Windows and Macintosh)...
Consistent with Web architecture, the XAML markup is programmable using JavaScript and works well with ASP.NET AJAX. Broadly available for customers in the first half of 2007, "WPF/E" experiences will require a lightweight browser plug-in made freely available by Microsoft.
This is major parts of.NET3 and Vista Foundations being released in a (non-linux) browser plug-in.
(What happened to you slashdot? You used to be cool.)
See Microsoft ClickOnce deployment for.NET for just what you're describing. The default security is *just like* a Java sand-boxed applet, and applications need to define any greater access to other resources.
http://msdn2.microsoft.com/en-us/vstudio/aa700952. aspx
Personally I don't like it -- to hard for the developer, and end users will just click OK anyway. Look into their scheme for certificates to secure this, from both the developer and the "publisher", to see a real mess that no end user will understand. The article is from the.NET 2.0 doc's, so I wonder if they're downplaying this feature?
They appear to be trying to protect DVD margins when they should be trying to do what Wal Mart does best. Revolutionize the distribution chain to gain advantage.
The problem for Walmart is, they can't squeeze a huge profit out of their suppliers when it comes to DVD's.
Shakespeare did not need to be able to make an exact quality of copy of other artists' works...
Parent:
It does not have to be an absolute lossless copy, merely a good quality copy. Hint - there is no perfect photographic copy that can be made with film.... it's inherently lossy.
So it's all about the method of copying? So long as its not digital, it's OK?
The rel attribute is designed to specify a forward relationship with the current document.
The attribute is used correctly with the "nofollow" value, except for the lack of "profiles" on the websites that use it. Profiles are supposed to define what values are used and what they mean - a dictionary of link types. I found this very informative: http://www.gmpg.org/xmdp/
"rel = link-types [CI] This attribute describes the relationship from the current document to the anchor specified by the href attribute. The value of this attribute is a space-separated list of link types."
http://www.w3.org/TR/html4/struct/links.html#adef- rel
"Authors may wish to define additional link types not described in this specification. If they do so, they should use a profile to cite the conventions used to define the link types. Please see the profile attribute of the HEAD element for more details."
http://www.w3.org/TR/html4/types.html#type-links
Mathematicians realized a century ago that their work is a discipline of arbitrary rules, and that none of their theorems have any inherent real-world truth or falsehood.
Godel didn't think so; he believed that numbers and math were things that existed separate from our understanding of the systems, and that they were to be learned and explored like science. If you think about non-enumerability, what kind of person would try to find such a thing? Not someone who believed its just the outcome of our rules.
A win for Universal would mean all user generated content on all sites would have to be pre-approved, which would be economically infeasible...
Not only that, you would have to know which things are copyrighted, and which are not. How are you supposed to know that for some random video or bit of text?
Can you offer any reasons why no platform functionally similar to DX has appeared for cross-platform use? Every game written in OpenGL and ported to multiple platforms must have much of the same base audio/networking/3d/etc.. functionality.
A DX replacement that's open source and works on many platforms seems like it would be a boon for game companies, yet there is not even any talk of such....
Please tell us a story about how a society has reacted to older changes in voting technology (like the pull lever in a booth,) and what was learned from that.
Maybe people don't realize the financial stability of OSTG. I always thought of it as a sort of corporate sponsored non-profit, that could disappear any year.
Mozilla is protecting the artwork with both trademark and copyright, and could solve this situation if they wanted.
> Is there no way that you could be convinced to split the license on
> the logo to have a DSFG-free copyright license and the same,
> restrictive trademark license. That would basically clear up the issue
> from our perspective and IMHO not weaken your ability to enforce your
> trademarks.
And the response from Mozilla:
At this point, its highly unlikely that we would allow any changes to
the license that would be compliant with the DFSG, certainly not
creation of derived works. The logo is a powerful brand and mark on its
own, and it would be fairly silly to give up the control of that mark in
such a way.
Mozilla could still have the "same, restrictive trademark license" to protect the trademark. Removing the copyright to allow "derived works" does not prohibit Mozilla from enforcing its trademark.
Microsoft won't be applying the DRM... then end users will be. They're the ones who received the music, are bound by it's license, and acted in a way that violated the license.
Can you argue that Microsoft is providing a system *intended* to break a CC license? (And what law would that break?) I wonder.
Slashdot Mirror
Politics in the US goes all the way from M to N. It's that far apart, and right in the middle.
Whether you think it matters *is* a matter of perspective.
- Press Ctrl+Alt+F5
- Login
- type "wc filename"
There it is! Some people will complain about anything!"I daresay you haven't had much practice," said the Queen. "When I was younger, I always did it for half an hour a day. Why, sometimes I've believed as many as six impossible things before breakfast."
(What happened to you slashdot? You used to be cool.)
See Microsoft ClickOnce deployment for .NET for just what you're describing. The default security is *just like* a Java sand-boxed applet, and applications need to define any greater access to other resources.
. aspx
.NET 2.0 doc's, so I wonder if they're downplaying this feature?
http://msdn2.microsoft.com/en-us/vstudio/aa700952
Personally I don't like it -- to hard for the developer, and end users will just click OK anyway. Look into their scheme for certificates to secure this, from both the developer and the "publisher", to see a real mess that no end user will understand. The article is from the
Home > Support > Professional > North Americap port_northamerica
http://www.postgresql.org/support/professional_su
http://web2.0bingo.com/
"rel = link-types [CI]- rel
This attribute describes the relationship from the current document to the anchor specified by the href attribute. The value of this attribute is a space-separated list of link types." http://www.w3.org/TR/html4/struct/links.html#adef
"Authors may wish to define additional link types not described in this specification. If they do so, they should use a profile to cite the conventions used to define the link types. Please see the profile attribute of the HEAD element for more details." http://www.w3.org/TR/html4/types.html#type-links
Godel didn't think so; he believed that numbers and math were things that existed separate from our understanding of the systems, and that they were to be learned and explored like science. If you think about non-enumerability, what kind of person would try to find such a thing? Not someone who believed its just the outcome of our rules.
Not only that, you would have to know which things are copyrighted, and which are not. How are you supposed to know that for some random video or bit of text?
Can you offer any reasons why no platform functionally similar to DX has appeared for cross-platform use? Every game written in OpenGL and ported to multiple platforms must have much of the same base audio/networking/3d/etc.. functionality.
A DX replacement that's open source and works on many platforms seems like it would be a boon for game companies, yet there is not even any talk of such....
Please tell us a story about how a society has reacted to older changes in voting technology (like the pull lever in a booth,) and what was learned from that.
You think they would have learned when the included IE4 in NT4 Service Pack 4 and broke all kinds of things - like Netscape's dominance in browsers.
(In fairness though, IE4 was better.)
(I had to.)
Maybe people don't realize the financial stability of OSTG. I always thought of it as a sort of corporate sponsored non-profit, that could disappear any year.
And the response from Mozilla:
Mozilla could still have the "same, restrictive trademark license" to protect the trademark. Removing the copyright to allow "derived works" does not prohibit Mozilla from enforcing its trademark.
Thanks. It seems obvious now that you said it.
Microsoft won't be applying the DRM... then end users will be. They're the ones who received the music, are bound by it's license, and acted in a way that violated the license.
Can you argue that Microsoft is providing a system *intended* to break a CC license? (And what law would that break?) I wonder.
http://appeal.kde.org/wiki/Appeal
If you use Ruby, check out http://appeal.kde.org/wiki/Korundum
If you make a Yahoo! Store that looks like Yahoo mail ... or an MSN page that looks like hotmail ...