Unless, of course, the system clipboard is on a different machine than the running copy of Vim. This is useful advice, you really don't have to be so negative about it just because you aren't in a situation where it's applicable.
If your ssh session has X11 forwarding enabled, and the remote terminal Vim has +xclipboard support, then you can use the "+P keystroke to paste directly from the clipboard into Vim.
All of those papers either post-date Intel's announcement from 2003 regarding tri-gate transistors, or are written by Intel employees. That search also brings up multiple patents held by Intel on the technology.
Since the story link is just to the project github page, here's a blog post from the person who did the performance optimization talking a little more about what he did:
O'Reilly doesn't seem to do that, unless it's embedded in the PDF in a way which doesn't show up in simple viewers.
Pragmatic Bookshelf, Manning and Packt (out of the e-books I have handy for quick checking) do put your name/address on the bottom of every page to discourage piracy.
Edit: Specifics for each publisher, for anyone who's curious:
Manning - Name and email address on each page
Pragmatic Bookshelf - Name on each page
Packt - Name, physical address and purchase date on each page
Downloads from O'Reilly's Safari Bookshelf, at least those in PDF format, have the account holder's name at the bottom of each page. If that's changed, it must have happened recently.
Yes, you're over-reacting. Your post sounds spiteful, and your threat of bad publicity sounds more like revenge than warning your fellow consumers. The way I see it, it would've been nice of them to give you a free MEAP copy, but it was well within their rights to refuse. Similarly, it's well within your rights to write a nasty blog post about how Manning is a bunch of meanies, but it'd be nice if you let it go, admitted that you made a mistake and got on with your life. It doesn't seem to me like there's anything to be gained by taking the low road here, even if you feel that it would be fair.
I have a story that starts similarly to yours, but ends very differently. I discovered "The Joy of Clojure" from a post here on HN, and after some consideration, I decided to pre-order. I was familiar with Amazon, but not with Manning, so I checked them out a little. I read their page about MEAPs and preview releases and really liked what I saw, so I pre-ordered the e-book copy from them directly, got my MEAP copy immediately and started reading. Since then, I've purchased/pre-ordered a half dozen other titles from them (frequently on steep discount thanks to their daily deals and newsletter sales) and they've become my go-to publisher for tech e-books when O'Reilly doesn't have what I'm looking for. I can't help but feel that my life would be ever-so-slightly poorer if I had had a bad experience with them right off the bat and decided to avoid them in the future.
Regardless of which path you decide to take, I hope that you enjoy reading the book. As someone who's fairly new to Clojure and functional programming, I've found it to be a great way to get deeper into the language as well as expand my horizons by exploring concepts like laziness and immutability that I don't see often enough as a Python programmer. Happy reading!
As the law was prior to this decision, the SEC had to have good cause to remove someone from the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board. The ruling was that requiring two levels of good cause between the President and the oversight board was unconstitutional, and now the SEC is able to remove oversight board members directly without requiring good cause. The logic is that this provides sufficient insulation from Presidential control, because the President still requires good cause to remove the SEC people who can remove oversight board members.
tl;dr: The SEC no longer requires good cause to remove oversight board members any more, and the President's power is essentially unchanged.
You are. They already have a dialect of Scheme that contains many extensions beyond the RxRS specs, this is just giving it a name so that people stop confusing "PLT's dialect of Scheme" with "Scheme in general".
Personally, I'm not a big fan of the name "Racket", because it makes me think of tennis rather than racketeering. However, I do support the idea of having a PLT "brand" rather than a hodgepodge of names like DrScheme, MrEd and mzscheme.
Makes sense, but I'm not sure I like the way it's headed. Scheme is so named due to a Lisp system called Planner. "Scheme" and "Planner" (and, I suppose, "Gambit") have mostly neutral connotations. "Swindle", "Larceny", "Heist", and now "Racket" are obviously criminal.
It's not a good direction, PR-wise. You end up with people having to justify to their bosses why they want to use something called Racket for work, or justifying to parents why their kids are learning Racket in schools.
(And then there's the inevitable analogy: Python : Pythonista :: Racket : Racketeer)
You end up with people having to justify to their bosses why they want to use something called Racket for work, or justifying to parents why their kids are learning Racket in schools.
Erm, Chrome supports Theora in HTML5 video. I just played a few of the examples from http://double.co.nz/video_test/ as well as the Opera page linked from there to test, and they worked fine.
By saying that it's not working, you assume that a raw domain.com is "broken" if it doesn't resolve to an address which is presumably the same as www.domain.com, which is pretty much baseless. There's no technical reason for a bare domain to resolve to anything, it's just a popular convention to make it redirect to www.domain.com because most people who type that into a browser expect your web site to come up.
Why not just add a CNAME for convenience? Who knows. They may have an internal technical reason, or it may just be a case of "don't do something unnecessary just because it's easy". For what it's worth, government agencies have a pretty good variety - army.mil and navy.mil both have the same behavior as nasa.gov, whitehouse.gov and justice.gov both have redirects to the "canonical" www url and house.gov and senate.gov both serve the same content as their www versions without a redirect either way.
Regardless of their particular reason, I see no cause to assume that it's due to laziness, funding level or how "high-tech" they are. It's just a convention that they don't use, but you expect.
It is "broken." You're right that "it's just a convention that they don't use, but you expect." But it's a convention that must prevent a handful of people from accessing their website each day, or at least causing them to Google "NASA" in confusion. There's no valid technical reason for doing this. It's a serious usability/findability fail.
