My guess is they want to complete the hardware and software stack to complete head on with IBM and SAP.

Palm had tens of thousands of apps available for it long before the iPhone was even designed. Many of those apps are still more powerful and useful than most iPhone apps because iPhone apps don't have access to the whole operating system and Apple won't let folks create apps that don't sit well with their business plan (which is why there's no real Google Voice on iPhone).

That is like saying, having your balls ripped of using a blunt knife is somewhat painful! The US allowed known IRA terrorists and fundraisers to stick around, but at the first opportunity we hand over some computer hacker, fuck that!

Ummm, ok. Etcetc. First, I don't believe in the conspiracy nonsense that the bad stuff on the Internet is just planted. But that's not the point. Maybe we have a fundamental disagreement here. You see, a user is responsible for everything that they knowingly and intentionally allow across their computers.

See, I don't have a problem with people running Tor nodes. Their risk, their decision, their choice. But I don't think that's a choice that someone else should make for those users without their knowledge. Then you're just shoving someone else, often unwillingly, in front of the firing squad.

So by all means, make Tor an option in Ubuntu. But to have it turned on by default would be the height of irresponsibility.

Here's the thing. The government really doesn't like going to court.

Requesting extradition means that the Feds are dead serious about prosecution.

Plea bargains are much less common - and much less generous - in the federal system.

Foreign based intrusions on US military networks do not get the kid glove treatment - no matter how trivial.

Is that the entire basis for "it was 14-year-old Willow whose dignity was flung in the mud,"? It sounds to me like the joke was clearly a reference to the daughter that got knocked up.

The fact that that daughter wasn't even present at the game is hardly relevant, considering it's obviously a joke and not a credible claim.

Any real criticism that Sarah Palin has had about her daughters was, as far as I know, all concerning how her family values apparently included getting knocked up before marriage.

Wow. Scary as hell, but fascinating.

Oh, yeah, oops - that was in a different thread. Doesn't matter, I was mostly wrong anyway.

I still don't believe extradition is appropriate in this case. It seems both cruel and unnecessary. (I think there's a quote from Terry Pratchett that would be very apropro here ... anyone?)

"The result sets are independent of each other."

Yes, that's why he could just multiply them like that.

If not, then I don't want it.

What's amazing to me is that my countrymen are stupid enough to fall for the ploy. The Democrats made the 2006 election about the wars. They were able to use the wars to get a majority in congress. From there, they took actions that were deliberately designed to cause the economy to slump just in time for the 2008 Presidential election. It was obvious, people like me were screaming it from the rooftops, yet most people didn't notice. The Democrats raised the minimum wage in July 2008, EVERY time they raise the minimum wage, 2-3 months later there is a surge in unemployment. The Democrats caused a downturn in the economy right before the election and not only did Bush's advisors not warn him but mainstream economists went along with it and acted surprised.

Now that they control the congress and the White House, Democrats are desperate to blame the Bush administration for their continued failure to reverse the economic slide. Remember you saw it here first, until the economy turns around every administration official is going to remind you that Bush was the President before Obama. It'll be subtle, but clear. They'll use phrases like "During the previous administration..." or "During the previous 8 years..." You'll see it, some of you will pretend that it's not spin, but you'll know.

LK

LK

The 'view spec' thing is idiocy in its purest form.

It seems that way because you're using it wrong. (Like any powerful language it gives you enough rope to hang yourself if you tell it to do the wrong thing.)

-You create a branch and a view that shows files in the branch on top of the trunk.

And that was your error. You should only use "latest" for YOUR changes.

-You edit file A.
-Some other guy edits files A and B so that B won't work without the changes in A.
-Your branched version blocks the other guy's changes in A so you have broken source code until you merge.

Which is why you NEVER specify the bleeding edge of the trunk as the base of your view spec. You specify a release tag or trunk-(or-shared-branch)-as-of-date/time. Nothing in your view changes unless YOU change it.

When you've got your version working you merge in TWO steps:
  1) Merge the changes in the trunk (or whatever shared branch you're using) TO your branch. (Switch the trunk start time to the moment you start this step and merge the changes.) Build and run tests. (Repeat if this took long enough that the trunk thrashed.)
  2) Merge your changes TO the trunk and build-run again. (The build should be quick because, unless a LOT changed after you started your last iteration of 1) the objects should all-or-mostly be the ones you built in step 1).)

Even the build for the final merge test runs from a tagged or date/time version of the trunk. That way if somebody else checks in THEIR merge during your build you still get the version YOU merged. If your tests passed you can say "I left the trunk working as of (tag or date/time)". This becomes very important when the smoke tests take longer than the mean time between fix merges.

If you're going to switch to diverge/converge you have to switch all the way. Part of the POINT of diverge-converge is that you see NOBODY'S CHANGES BUT YOUR OWN until you have your part working and are ready to merge or you find you MUST incorporate somebody else's fix to get your stuff working.

Clearcase gives you the fine-grained control over what you "see" which makes this style a breeze.

whoa totally pooched that second sentence: It was published and he got some cash out of it...

Damn I need more coffee...

I worked with a guy at a particular defense contractor who, while on company time and on company assets, wrote a decent short story. I was published and her got some cash out of it. His bosses caught wind and trying to "claim" the work as the companies since it was on company time and conpany assets. Apparently (IANAL) though there is this thing called RELEVANCY that factors into this. Since his employers had nothing to do with literary endevors they didn't have a claim to the work, it was irrelivant to his job. For instance jotting down a new formula for a soda on a company provided post-it note while at work doesn't give your employer ownership of that unless they somehow deal in ... well... soda.

You are not a slave and your employer doesn't own you, nor do they own your imagination. As long as what you do personally doesn't involve your work there is a resonable barrier between the two. I haven't heard of someone coming up with a great recipe for BBQ while working at a Ford plant and having Ford try and claim ownership. I think the judge would throw them out on their ear.

However I fear that we might end up slaves all too quickly if we don't raise hell on issues like this. It's already getting so far that former employers can sue you if you go work for a competitor without a non-compete agreement.

Slavery comes in many forms besides whips and chains...