Nice
It's good to the Vxers getting back to writing effecent code.
Back in the day, it was some of the tightest code out there. (also video demos)
1937 publicly visible posts • joined 6 Oct 2008
those contracts have a termination penalty. the reason offered for the termination penalty is TO PAY FOR THE SUBSIDIZED PHONE. Everyone I know who isn't provided a phone from work is going to non-traditional carriers, because the scam is out of hand. I'm waiting for them to try to outlaw any but the big 3 wireless providers.
PLEASE teach it right.
They need to understand normalization, what it is, why we do it. They need to understand SQL's features for input validation, and why we use them. What ACID is, why we like it.
The last thing I want is more people making up DB layouts which are completely unmaintainable.
Japan has certain unrelinquishable moral rights, which are considered to conflict with the western concept of the public domain.
OTOH, Japan also only recognizes copyrights of Japanese citizens, Japanese corporations, and where required by treaty. Which implies (to me, at least) that if an unemployed foreigner put their work in the public domain, Japan shouldn't recognize a copyright.
"Article 6. The following shall be granted protection under this Law:
(i) works of Japanese nationals ("Japanese nationals" includes legal persons established under the Japanese law and those who have their principal offices in this country; the same shall apply hereinafter);
(ii) works first published in this country, including those first published outside this country and published in this country within thirty days of that first publication;
(iii) works not falling within those mentioned in the preceding two items, to which Japan has the obligation to grant protection under an international treaty."
http://www.cric.or.jp/cric_e/clj/cl1.html
You could not be more wrong. The GPL does not transfer a copyright. Some groups (such as the FSF) require a copyright assignment, because it gives the group standing. This must be dealt with separately from the GPL.
Copyright transfers require it to be specified, in writing (if it where ME I'd want it signed and notarized, FSF seems fine with just a signature). This was one of the things that got SCO in trouble. Novell had promised to transfer copyrights, but never actually did, therefore they did not have the right to sue for copyright violations, even if there where any!
Other groups take the policy that it's too dangerous to have all the copyrights held by one group, and so want a number of copyright holders. This approch has the upside that you don't have to trust the organization.
The GPL doesn't reverse ANYTHING. If you receive a copy of a piece of code I released under the GPL, under a non-compatible license, what are you going to do about it?
FUCK ALL. You have no standing to do anything. The only thing you can do about it, is contact me. IF I think it's worth my time, I can pursue legal action. Realistically, it probably isn't. I'm not going to see much from most GPL violations, so it's just a money sink. The only reason to pursue is principle, and I'm not wealthy enough to be principled.
Your rights aren't protected, the developer's are.
The CSS was sent every machine that visited their site. Each one was a copyright violation. The first thing I would do is to ask the court for the logs. I have the sneaking suspicion it would show a pattern of willful, systemic, criminal copyright violation.
I'm thinking, as was done in cases of just linking to violating material, jail time may be in order.
Considering his next sentence is: "Windows 8 is key to the future ... the Surface computer ... Bing, people have seen is a better search product ... the Xbox," I would venture to speculate that might be what he is talking about. I wouldn't say that *I* think any of those other then the Xbox are successful, but obviously Mr. Gates believes that they they will be.
"Predictions are hard, especially when they are about the future." --(attributed to) Yogi Berra (amongst others)
While this seems to be a common concept from the commantards, I don't think I have seen much of an editorial policy around it. I have only seen that put into print ONCE in an article.
One piece is hardly editorial policy to repeat.
(I miss the elReg gravestone. I used to love to use it ironically when defending our favorite rag)
The fine article said there is a shutter.
More importantly, you still have Winston Smith's problem... how do you block the audio?
I see lots of 1984 references, with these kind of articles, but noone even sees the problems the book saw. How many people actually read it?
The voice may not have said that the car ran out of power, but that is what any reasonable person would assume from the video accompanying it. What other reason would they have to be pushing the thing other then a failure?
Put another way:
If I pop a picture of you up on the screen when talking about pedophiles, I think you might (rightly) consider that slander. I wouldn't be CALLING you a pedophile, but any reasonable person would assume that's the message I was intending to convey.
strange...
The latest machine I got seems to have the ability to install new keys... like a key I generate myself... and I use to sign a bootloader...
Not that I had to use that feature to boot linux on the thing (just disabled SecureBoot). I'll admit I haven't played with that feature yet, but if it works as described, I'll consider it a win.
I think I just figured out why everything is supposed to be full screen now... that makes the acronym ART, which is what there commercials make me think of... all form, no function, and a purpose made up on the spot.
"This piece represents the intrinsic fatality of modern consumerism. The round top makes reminds us of the reuse that the chaff of our society could be taking and..."
"dude, it's a trash can"
that may be true, but you are not comparing apples to apples. he did this 350 times. so lets say he was a serial killer who killed 350 people:
350*25= 8750 years.
also let's do the opposite and see how much time he gets for each woman he victimized:
150/350=0.43 years
So that means for each person he blackmailed, he gets less then 1/2 a year. That doesn't sound that outlandish to me, quite the opposite, it sounds lenient.
You know, as a home user, I think this would make me look for alternatives. It's worth noting that home users are generally not as demanding as business users (when was the last time you saw home user with a marginally complex Excel doc?).
100 USD a year is just too much for what they are offering, which is to say a suite of tools which only gets used 5 times a year or so (for the average home user). If they want users to move to a subscription model (which they DESPERATELY need, as they are starting to have difficulties coming up with new improvements), then they need to get this into the cheap enough to not even be worth thinking about it range. I'd put that at 20 USD a year.
(YMMV)
As a point of fact, the only one of those acoustic couplers I've ever actually seen, was 300 baud. Wackypedia claims the practical limit was 1200 baud, achieved in the early 80s, they certainly did not run at even 5400 baud.
Wargames (1983) actually got a number of things surprisingly right, and it is probably one of the most technically accurate fictional accounts of hacking. In fact, the term "Wardialing" (from which the modern "wardriving" comes) originated from this movie (the actual practice existed before, but, by all accounts, this term did not enter the lexicon until 1983).
I'm horrified to report, that in checking my recollections for this post there was a "Wargames 2" released in 2008. I'm going to go cry myself to sleep now.
That's because Mega is creating a scarcity and then charging you for it. In effect, it's creating virtual property.
Some lockers do this, but many don't.
So what you are suggesting is that they use their infinite bandwidth and infinite storage space to give the service for free?
Your assertion that "Mega is creating a scarcity and then charging you for it," only makes sense if they have unlimited free resources, otherwise the scarcity already exists and they need to charge you for it to make sure they have the resources to provide the service and make a profit.
You then move on to "... it's creating virtual property." I'm rather surprised to see you complain about that. I presume you make your living writing. This article is nothing more then virtual property (for when I received it, it was only a stream of bits), which you seem to be of the opinion should not be charged for. So can we presume that you will not be accepting payment for any more articles you write?
The reality is TWC is looking for a way to argue that their cable service is somehow worth paying for rather then just paying them for transit and on-demanding from NFLX.
NFLX is being unbelievably nice here. "OK, ISPs, we know you are oversubscribed, and we know we totally break your model, so we are going to offer you free peering to us. Our customers get better service, you can contenue to make money hand over fist by not paying for enough bandwidth for what your selling, and your customers think you actually give a shit about their service."
"Well, one minor problem for us at TWC, we make fat stacks of cash by offering video service, so we really don't like that arrangement."