"We understand that services are important to you,"
Was this understanding gained recently?
40558 publicly visible posts • joined 16 Jun 2014
"So yeah, it COULD be a license violation, if we had license text to prove it."
Put the link I gave into the Wayback mackine, go back a few years and you can read it. The problem isn't finding the licence, the problem's working through the Intel document mountain to see if they do acknowledge it.
The FAQ link to the licence on the Minix site, http://www.minix3.org/license.html returns 404 and, according to archive.org has done so for some years. Going back to an older version it is, as the FAQ states, a fairly standard BSD link which requires that binary distributions credit the origin in the documentation. I wonder if Intel do that and if so how conspicuously. A very quick search through the generation 8 datasheet failed to find anything and Tanenbaum himself has recently said that it would have been nice if they'd let him know. Does Intel's use actually abide by the terms of the licence?
So it seems the truck was reversing slowly out, and the shuttle just "safely" stopped and sat there waiting to be hit. Failure on both sides, I'd say.
And public policy is always to blame a driver. If there's only one it becomes easy to choose.
What's all this "improvised this that and the other" bollocks?
Maybe you've never seen one. They don't look high-tech with 7-seg red LEDs and loud bleeps like you see on James Bond. "Improvised" was probably the first appropriate word that came to mind when some ATO was writing up his report.
Scientology - Yup, no quibble with dissing that. It's a cult invented by a Sci-fi author. The name is about as close to being an -ology as it gets.
Egyptology - Funny you should mention that and contrast it to physics. Someone who first established the wave theory of light by demonstrating interference, first defined energy as a term in physics; would you say he was a physicist? Meet Thomas Young, "the last man to know everything", physicist, polymath - and Egyptologist. Actually, once a bi-lingual, tri-script inscription was found and it was realised the language had survived in the form of Coptic the study of ancient Egypt was placed on a fairly sound footing. You might wonder why anyone should bother but then I suppose a lot of people will, over the years, have wondered why anyone bothered with some of the more arcane areas of mathematics.
Palaeontology and teeth - You may have led a sheltered life and not realised this but over the years zoologists have looked at a vast array of animal species in minute detail. As a consequence they have a reasonable competence in recognising mammalian teeth when they see them. They also know - and this might come as a surprise to you - that there's an overall plan to mammalian dentition. So they can recognise what part of the jaw a tooth comes from.
They can also recognise when a tooth comes from a full-grown individual as opposed to an infant and, taking that together with their knowledge of that overall plan, they can work out that small teeth come from an animal with a small jaw (you don't get mammals having indeterminate numbers of small teeth in a large jaw). If the jaw is small it can't feed a large body so they know they're looking at a species where the adult size is small.
One of the things they also know about mammals is that they need to keep the body temperature fairly high to be active. If an animal is small it has a high surface to volume ratio so it loses heat rapidly (this is almost like a real science, say physics, isn't it). To minimise heat loss it would need some form of insulation. Given that it's a mammal this is more likely to be made out of hair rather than feathers so it's a reasonable deduction that it's a furry creature.
What else was there? Oh, yes, its diet. Again, that comes from looking at the teeth of a lot of different species and comparing them with their diets. After a while they get to recognise the adaptations that go with different sorts of diet.
Over the years zoologists have gained a lot of experience with looking at a new species and being able to predict aspects of its life-style. Such predictions can be checked. Do they have to be able to check predictions made on the basis of fossil evidence? If you're given the fact that a triangle has sides of ration 3:4:5 do you have to go through Pythagoras' theorem from scratch to know there's a right angle in there?
TL;DR Just because you don't have the background knowledge doesn't mean that nobody else does. Or, to put it another way, whatever your bag is there's a reasonable probability that it's something I don't know in detail so, on your view, if I don't know what you're talking about neither do you.
If a one-off purchase requires some on-going expenditure by the vendor to keep working it's always going to end in tears.
There are only two ways it could be made to work:
- the initial price is high enough to provide an annuity that will support the service in the future and at present interest rates that's going to price it out of the market.
- the purchaser is going to be the product in which case it could be given away.
If a one-off purchase requires some on-going expenditure by the vendor to keep working it's always going to end in tears.
There are only two ways it could be made to work:
- the initial price is high enough to provide an annuity that will support the service in the future and at present interest rates that's going to price it out of the market.
- the purchaser is going to be the product.
"The only thing which helps is to get users to stop re-using their passwords."
There is one thing that businesses could do to help themselves. Stop specifying the customer's email address as the user ID. As most people only have one email address the hacker doesn't have to guess both ID and password.
"I would suggest that the implications for our trust in official information from the US government, Twitter as a communications platform, and the Internet Archive as the historical record are significant,"
There are similar implications for anyone who views a social media account as a form of "identity" (for want of a better word).
"They have to buy in programming from third parties because the Government says they have to"
Yes. And this is a Select Committee MPs asking about it. So they can recommend that the Govt change it. It's the sort of thing Select Committees are supposed to do if they find something wrong.
One is that increasingly the BBC "catalogue" doesn't actually belong to the BBC, because the BBC is obliged to buy a lot of programmes from third parties.
That raises the question of why this should continue if it isn't helping the Beeb. I suspect the reason is that it's helping Beeb execs. If they don't want to sully their brains with actually making programmes they can go out to expensive lunches with companies who want to sell them programmes. And if they do want to they can take nice jobs with the 3rd parties and sell back to their erstwhile colleagues at the said lunches.
They've already got out of running the actual transmitting network. Maybe they should be given the option of being freed of the 3rd party obligation and told to produce their own stuff or to get out of ... well, I suppose, employment altogether.
Rather silly convention if you ask me.
English has a perfectly usable gender pronoun, "it". In fact "they" is the plural of "it".
English personal pronouns and their accompanying tenses are rather more complicated than you think. For instance, why is the 2nd person always plural in modern English?.
"Completely disagree with your opinion on the printers themselves - for SOHO with low to moderate printing needs, brother printers are my first choice, both for reliability and for cost-effectiveness."
I have one and whilst it's a good printer it does seem to get lost from the network from time to time.
"I'd be hugely amused if Microsoft implemented a system whereby any customer of MS Federal Sales had to provide reams of documentation and evidence of eligibility in order to activate their software"
And also prove that neither their staff nor contractors were running cracked hookey versions at home.
"If your a small business, having to accept card payments - especially for smaller transactions - cuts into your profit."
OTOH it means the money goes into your account without having to wait to take it to the bank which, these days, is becoming a longer hike. I wonder how the two aspects balance each other out. The fact that some shops offer cashback suggests that cards win.
"Every fee-free ATM is unprofitable, and every business seeks to eliminate unprofitable activities."
Which was the point of my earlier post. The banks set up ATMs to save money, which they still do in comparison with the costs of counter staff (who, if they're anything like the last Lloyds' counter staff I encountered will also cost custom). It ill becomes them to then complain about the cost of saving money and it would serve them right if we went back to asking for cash at the counters.
" If you gloat you cannot get paid."
Gloating doesn't have to be public. You can gloat all the way to the bank.
The only thing to worry about is that your part in one breach gets outed because it's documented in stuff that subsequently comes out when your own solicitors get breached.
It looks as if we're getting about as far as the pendulum swings on this particular cycle. Then a few people realise that the lock-in has made it difficult to get anything done without consulting the resident Kubernetes or whatever wizards or break the hold the beancounters have on the AWS account and it would be a lot easier to sneak in a PC or two...
"What we don't like"
Perhaps I should qualify "we" as GB. During the troubles in we got used in NI to having to provide ID at checkpoints. It came as a major culture shock to my parents when they visited and we got stopped at a VCP on a back road from Aldergove to Listburn.
I'm curious as to what's the attitude there now. Anybody?