The only difference is whether it's legal to do so.
That's a pretty big difference where I come from. Consider the following scenario: Person A writes some code and publishes source under GPL. B makes changes and publishes only compiled program. A wants to further enhance the program.
Under current copyright law + GPL he can sue. Without copyright law, A has reimplement the changes or get on his knees for B.
It wouldn't matter. There would always be someone who would accept wikileak's bitcoins, and there would always be someone who would exchange my USD into bitcoins. Wikileaks had a problem because Wikileaks had to use the same service as I did.
because not solving all problems at the same time is worse than doing nothing? Because when someone buys food from a drive-in, it's impossible to keep it in the bag until you get home?
People keep saying stuff like this, but in my experience it's just not true. Right now I'm clocking Firefox at 596,900 kB commit + 75,000 kB for the plugin-container. I have never seen it above 1 GB, although I've only sampled maybe once/month. Are you using another measuring technique than I, or are you just trolling?
You're doing it wrong. If you mock people based on their consumption choices, you have to state your own choice so we can mock you in return. Watch and learn:IE socks! Telnet+Lynx FTW!
The difference is, though, that there is no sun to provide energy. We'd need to lug an extra (~1kW/m2 * 500 yrs) with us. And I don't think lithium batteries will cut it.
If we ignore humans for a second, the next link in the food chain will either develop PCB resistance or learn not to eat that species. And then, the fish may use this poison actively as a defense mechanism. Oh evolution, you are cool!
First, a question: Why is it such a bad thing to use whitespace as syntax?
Second, the act of indenting your code is not in itself a bad thing (when we talk "normal" languages like C), so why is it suddenly a bad habit when they pick it up in Python?
Couldn't the rootkit just take control of the actual boot sector, and then present something else to the OS? And isn't the point of modding the boot sector to make the rootkit boot before the OS, thereby making (the first stage of) the rootkit independent of OS?
I'm not from the US, but it doesn't sound to me like these people want communism. You know, there is a fairly large middle ground between Soviet-style leadership and "the market must be free"-politics.
As soon as someone figures out a more useful way to access the internet than simply tunneling through http/s [...]
As soon as that happens, an attacker could just write his program in javascript instead of stuffing it into a VM running on the same JS engine, with the same access restrictions.
[...] to a dedicated application running on the same host as the browser [...]
What's with all the hoops? if the attacker can run an application with net access, there is no need for a Linux VM.
Slashdot Mirror
The only difference is whether it's legal to do so.
That's a pretty big difference where I come from.
Consider the following scenario:
Person A writes some code and publishes source under GPL.
B makes changes and publishes only compiled program.
A wants to further enhance the program.
Under current copyright law + GPL he can sue. Without copyright law, A has reimplement the changes or get on his knees for B.
I'm not sure I understand the point you are trying to make. Did you read the post I was replying to?
Not true - you can keep source code hidden if there was no copyright.
Why didn't all religions have that?
Aren't Bing and Yahoo running on the same engine?
It wouldn't matter. There would always be someone who would accept wikileak's bitcoins, and there would always be someone who would exchange my USD into bitcoins.
Wikileaks had a problem because Wikileaks had to use the same service as I did.
Besides - who uses e-mail for anything anymore?
OK, next question: do you encrypt your Facebook status updates?
because not solving all problems at the same time is worse than doing nothing? Because when someone buys food from a drive-in, it's impossible to keep it in the bag until you get home?
Because cars can only contain one person?
People keep saying stuff like this, but in my experience it's just not true. Right now I'm clocking Firefox at 596,900 kB commit + 75,000 kB for the plugin-container.
I have never seen it above 1 GB, although I've only sampled maybe once/month.
Are you using another measuring technique than I, or are you just trolling?
sproketboy != Slashdot
You're doing it wrong. If you mock people based on their consumption choices, you have to state your own choice so we can mock you in return.
Watch and learn:IE socks! Telnet+Lynx FTW!
How do you know he uploaded it, and not some anon schmuck?
True, but a comma is larger and easier to notice. Especially when drawn with a pen(cil). :)
The difference is, though, that there is no sun to provide energy. We'd need to lug an extra (~1kW/m2 * 500 yrs) with us. And I don't think lithium batteries will cut it.
I don't think "I think you mean" means what you think "I think you mean" means...
If Android is sued out of existence, I'll bet you a lot of people will be jumping ship to MS rather than Apple.
Developing for WP7 requires a mac?
If we ignore humans for a second, the next link in the food chain will either develop PCB resistance or learn not to eat that species. And then, the fish may use this poison actively as a defense mechanism.
Oh evolution, you are cool!
First, a question: Why is it such a bad thing to use whitespace as syntax?
Second, the act of indenting your code is not in itself a bad thing (when we talk "normal" languages like C), so why is it suddenly a bad habit when they pick it up in Python?
Couldn't the rootkit just take control of the actual boot sector, and then present something else to the OS? And isn't the point of modding the boot sector to make the rootkit boot before the OS, thereby making (the first stage of) the rootkit independent of OS?
I'm not from the US, but it doesn't sound to me like these people want communism. You know, there is a fairly large middle ground between Soviet-style leadership and "the market must be free"-politics.
As soon as someone figures out a more useful way to access the internet than simply tunneling through http/s [...]
As soon as that happens, an attacker could just write his program in javascript instead of stuffing it into a VM running on the same JS engine, with the same access restrictions.
[...] to a dedicated application running on the same host as the browser [...]
What's with all the hoops? if the attacker can run an application with net access, there is no need for a Linux VM.
But where is the advantage? I would assume that the linux VM would face the same restrictions as any other javascript in a browser.
No space after the period (just a guess).