What tales of horror do Slashdotters have of family tech support?
Wow, troll much? Copying a file (especially one that I've already decided on moral grounds that I will not pay for) is NOT stealing because the company doesn't lose anything from it. In order for there to be theft, someone must lose something while another gains. They lose nothing by copying a file.
I don't get people like you - why don't you care about your rights? Why don't you care about having control over the property you pay for? Why are you so eager to be beaten down and forced to do things against your will? It's completely illogical.
The names of spies must be kept secret for many of the same reasons.
In criminal investigations the identities of informants must be kept secret.
It's not an option to release that information. Because if the government did not protect that information, the government would have no informants, spies, or intelligence capability.
I'm guessing that the CPU limits are generous and are more about filtering out bad algorithms than bad languages.
Unless, of course, running time features into the scoring...
Yeah, but from the article:
Still, many malware agents slip through the cracks undetected... until the rules of the anti-virus programs are updated, that is.
Instead of looking for known patterns -- whether of instructions and data, or of actions -- wouldn't it be great if we could look for anything that is malicious? That may sound like a pipe dream.
Maybe it's just badly worded or written, but he's making it sound like he's found the panacea of virus detection. Unfortunately, it doesn't work on viruses which a) don't have a known signature and b) don't try to keep themselves in RAM (i.e. don't mind being swapped out.) I would think that if the virus can overwrite parts of the OS in memory that it would not detect those, either (e.g. it could overwrite services which are commonly started but uncommonly used and live in their process space--autoupdaters would be good candidates for this.)
What this proves is that the USPTO doesn't need to be reformed, it needs to be scrapped. There's little legitimate point in having it at all anymore. The people it supposedly should protect (the small inventors) are the very people crushed by it. They and the rest of us would be better off if it no longer existed at all.
And this is why I never let Paypal fund the payment from my bank account and force them to use my credit card.
If there is a problem with the order I just call the credit card company and they will reverse the purchase on their end.
But better I avoid eBay and paypal as much as I can.
Yep. Glass over map, good high-resolution camera mounted above (as far as possible), long steady exposure. Maybe some stitching afterwards.
I'll be happy to take care of any of your clients that are foolish enough to want their websites to look and function similarly across all major browsers. Viva la revolucion!
and what of the client who wants to differentiate his site by offering tech that has emerged and evolved outside the standards, like Flash?
the wheels of the gods grind slowly.
there is nothing to stop some new or unexpected entrant - from unleashing the next must-have plug-in.
the plug-in that is well on its way to 98% penetration of the market before the standards committee can nail down proposals that first saw the light of day over five to ten years ago.
"Stupidity, like virtue, is its own reward" -- William E. Davidsen