Wozniack has made objective reports that he is a "terrible" person. Really? Terrible?
I've seen reports (and no report made on the character of another person is truly objective) he's a taskmaster, a jerk who wants things his way. I wouldn't call them terrible people. I don't see him getting accused of racism or sexual harrasment.
Being in tech support I interact with people like that all the time. No reason to wish them ill health.
What objective accounts?
if public sector research developed something, how can you prove that private companies WOULD have done it for less? Unless they both happen to develop simultaneously, without knowledge of the other (so no cross contamination of work) you can't prove it. You also can't prove that if the private sector developed something that the public sector would have for far less (or more).
Why would FIFA even have passport data at all? At what point to they collect passport data from attendees? What happens if you refuse to show them your passport?
I like Puppy Linux for a very small portable Linux.
I've used it several times as a recovery disc and booted from USB as well. Should work well in any virtual environment too.
Yes. Either:
a) Provide, with evidence, a measurable alternative other than man-made greenhouse gases to the increased energy in the atmosphere (remember no solar increases have been measured in 50 years but temperatures have continued going up.)
b) The measured global temperature declines for enough years for it to be an obvious trend. One year ain't cutting it, and cherry picking your start dates to show a decline is also not going to work.
there are probably others, but either of these cases would falisfy the current theory. You'll have to do actual work to prove it, not sit around on the internet spouting the same tired crap as everyone else, but that's science how science works.
the only way they might actually come up with a decent answer is in putting their egos away and actually working together. Instead I bet every company tries to twist the process into their own advantage over the other participants, just like they do when they sit on standards bodies.
They're fighting the wrong fragmentation. The fragmentation is in the number of handset form factors, chipsets and OSes. Apple, Google, and now even Microsoft are fighting this fragmentation. Apple with total control over all form factors and OSes they use. Google with a standard OS, but less standardized form factors. And with Win Phone microsoft said they'll be vetting manufacturers more than in the past and won't allow UI skinning.
Write once, run everywhere doesn't work when the basic functionality of each device varies so much.
writing focuses me on the subject and forces me to listen, think about it, then write. just "listening, and thinking" means thinking about girls, at least for me. I remember something I wrote far more than something i just listened to.
If students are writing everything the teacher says, like a stenographer, then they're doing it wrong.
If the teachers slides are sufficient notes, then they're doing it wrong.
a stylus isn't required, but that doesn't mean it can't use one. here's one for the iphone from think geek:
http://www.thinkgeek.com/gadgets/cellphone/a31f/
here's how to make your own:
http://lifehacker.com/5277112/make-a-diy-iphone-stylus-for-precision-greasy-fingers
Holy crap this is idiotic.
I learned on an Apple
For the Mac and iPhone OS Apple now gives away the entire IDE, compilers, simulators, everything FOR FREE.
Sure if I want to load an app I wrote on to my iPod Touch the "official" way I have to pay Apple $99 for the developer membership (there is no need for Apple approval of any app you write to load on your own device.) Or if I can't afford the $99 -- I jailbreak my iPod. Considering the few qualms I had about pirating an Assembler, if i were in a tinkering mood jailbreaking would be a no brainer. Heck, it isn't even stealing like my pirating was.
If anything the tools and capabilties of tinkering with todays devices is WAY cooler than when I was kid. Peek/Poke. Screw that, now you can write Objective-C. And if it turns out really, really cool you can sell it to a world wide audience for only $99.
> an "encryption system" needs to store its key (or a method of obtaining the key) in the source or else the client can't view the content at all.
This is untrue for an "encryption system". It is generally true for a DRM system.
GPG, PGP, many open source projects implementing encryption systems such as AES, DES, etc... have no qualms about their source being public. Because the keys do NOT need to be included in the source.
DRM system such as DVD encryption however requires the player to be able to decode the disc for playback, but they don't want the user to be able to playback on non-certified devices. This means the player has to have a key to decode the files. Keys don't need to be stored in the source, but the source would reveal how the key was used. It would reveal implementation problems that could make breaking the DRM easier.
Well there are costs to storage and shipping, they're just a hell of a lot lower than the cost of storing and shipping atoms. it's not like those bits magically appear in the kindle from nowhere.
The other line moves faster.
