Slackware had the uncertainty of Patrick's situation, the perception that the base was allowed to become stale, and the removal of gnome from the officially supported base. RedHat had a nice little garden that they diced up with paywalls... No too hard to build from source, but still, it turned me onto deb.
A revenue sharing license limits the contributor base for your project based on increases in accounting overhead to track and disburse monies over time.
And that page you linked is scary. They claim to pre-define growth rates on participating code-bases to protect against devaluing of contributor shares. WTF.
I assure you the first post was a joke (even though that is roughly the model AC I use). If serious I would have chimed in about my containment strategy like so:
My rack room vents straight up through an insulated hard lid ceiling. Back-pressure is prevented with two fans that blow the warm air from above the lid, through a full height wall, and into a non-climate controlled warehouse...
Will Robert Plant drop his Aleister Crowley obsession in favor of studying the Pioneer anomaly?
That would be quite the unexplained deviation of trajectory for Mr. Plant. Whether he is unmanned or not is up for debate. Has he been doing any ED ads yet?
Sure, at my small office I can shout down the hall and get a pretty quick answer. This article is about the Linux kernel. Matters of scale make me averse to contacting anyone without significant research to make sure that I am not part of a DDOS on the coder who was unlucky enough to have some clever code signed off by a maintainer.
If you aren't familiar enough with the function and the relevant landscape you shouldn't be emailing kernel devs. And if the function is that clever I guarantee there is a conversation about it somewhere.
To be fair, if you are trying to get in on kernel development you probably should be able to profile the function yourself. I think the more productive approach is to research on your own until you understand the subject matter, then focus on comparative analysis such as what does this function do inefficiently, or is this function future-proof.
The point was not that open source developers should be obligated to implement everything the end users ask for, but rather that open source doesn't work the way people have been claiming for a decade.
Claims about the way that open source works? The point of the open licenses is to allow developers that work differently, have different needs and preferences or ego trips to create their own communities or go it alone.... and that is how it works.
My perception is that if a user goes through enough participation that they are recognized by the devs on the lists their feedback will usually be taken into consideration. By the time they have that recognition they have probably assisted the community in some way and they don't have to be bitching out in the cold, but can rather get their suggestions directed to the proper parties.
Fact is, even when a community has a guiding body instead of just a Maintainer that coordinates volunteers it is still better to research the history of similar requests put forth on the lists in the past, then find the devs that might actually be interested in your idea if it hasn't already been beaten to death within that community. In this scenario there is no complaining or listening to users, there is a conversation between community members that have proven themselves as such by steady participation over time.
The fact that one of the members in the conversation can't code doesn't come into play anymore because it is assumed that they will be willing to dogfood the changes, file accurate bug reports, and probably help out on lists/forums when questions come up about details of the implementation... basically there is confidence that the person doing the requesting will remain a part of the process.
Once a 'user' has done the groundwork it will be a pretty simple equation of how insightful their feedback turns out to be vs the amount of resources required to implement vs how able the developers are to add more work to their schedules. Fork at any time.
I started with a marine radio receiver kit from HeathKit. Don't know if they are available anymore, but it was more engrossing than a book would have been. After that project I was able to approach the written material with some context for understanding. I guess it depends on what sort of learning method appeals to the poster.
The AC is probably referring to the infections that the farmed salmon have transmitted to nearby wild populations. I don't know if transmission is via escape or simple proximity, but there has been some noise about the issue.
Just like with the meat industrial complex animals, the farmed salmon require high doses of meds because of the unnatural and crowded living environment, and this has resulted in some aggressive infections for which the wild population is unprepared.
Slowdown? We won't get military support that way, therefore no funding. We smash something into it at maximum speed and let the military gather transport and devastation metrics from a collision involving speeds never before recorded by human instruments.
Then the astronomers study the ejecta, the engineers review vehicle performance metrics, the doomsday prophets rework their asteroid impact models, the cosmologists continue to try to convince their mother-in-laws that they really are cosmologists despite not knowing anything about t-zones, foundation blending, manicuring, waxing.... and no, that doesn't mean they went to a bad 'school of cosmology.'
The no transmission part kinda seems silly... They should only be handing these things out in completely dark rooms where recipients have been patted down for low light vision assist equipment. Then they need to recollect the docs before any light is allowed in or doors are opened to allow people out.
Without these precautions there is a chance the copyrighted information on the page may come into contact with visible spectrum radiation, potentially violating the no transmission clause. Imagine if someone's occular nodes were oriented in such a way to receive visible spectrum radiation that had previously contacted the copyrighted material.
Either those rubes don't understand that words printed on a page don't transmit themselves or this is entrapment by Microsoft.
Over? This thing is just beginning. Their public moves in China did not allow the regime to save face. The criticism out of Google was way too direct following the hacking incident, and it did not leave a face saving path to resolution for the Chinese Government.
By diminishing their visibility at the helm of Google they are both hardening the target and reducing the impact that their personal and now mandatory falls from grace will have on the company. Either way, someone is going to have to feel the pain for the way the China situation was handled. Better it be the millionaires and not the foot soldiers.
This would not be the first time that the government has helped/hired/worked with outside agencies to collect information that they cannot legally collect directly. My presumption would be that with updating such records about the members of InfraGuard, they can find the InfraGuard members best suited for covert information gathering of a technical nature. But that's just a guess.
My guess would be that InfraGuard is many things simultaneously, including a honey-pot. If the people coordinating these actions don't already have an in-house red team that the blue team is trying to uncover as a part of this information collection action then the program is failing. I imagine there is a lot of flushing of shit to see where it surfaces, actions designed to thresh the participant pool, actions designed to stress the oversight panels, etc...
Integrity of any distributed system is a hard thing to ensure. A network of this sort is somewhat like the financial markets in that the values of any significant subset of the system can only be estimated in real time.
Anyhow, if it is successful it will probably end up as an incubator for all sorts of nasty things, as it is the connections made between private sector participants through organizations of this sort that yield subsequent generations of tyrannical cabalistas.
Coders, bloggers, and DJ's are not the people writing the books and performing the music being pirated. My point was that those people are not well represented here, and the conversation is not balanced.
And the CNN piece was balanced? What should we do? Stop talking and let the industry mouthpieces blare on and on without counter-point? Are we supposed to wait to discuss anything until we have a quorum of vetted social commentators to guide our thoughts to socially acceptable conclusions? Fuck off.
Slashdot Mirror
Slackware had the uncertainty of Patrick's situation, the perception that the base was allowed to become stale, and the removal of gnome from the officially supported base. RedHat had a nice little garden that they diced up with paywalls... No too hard to build from source, but still, it turned me onto deb.
Anyhow, the GP has a pretty valid point IMO.
A revenue sharing license limits the contributor base for your project based on increases in accounting overhead to track and disburse monies over time.
And that page you linked is scary. They claim to pre-define growth rates on participating code-bases to protect against devaluing of contributor shares. WTF.
I assure you the first post was a joke (even though that is roughly the model AC I use). If serious I would have chimed in about my containment strategy like so:
My rack room vents straight up through an insulated hard lid ceiling. Back-pressure is prevented with two fans that blow the warm air from above the lid, through a full height wall, and into a non-climate controlled warehouse...
Have you tried promising them cake?
I leave this on: http://home-solutions.hsn.com/amana-12-000-btu-portable-air-conditioner-and-dehumidifier-with-remote_pf-450623_xp.aspx?club_id=450623&sz=888&sf=HW0130&rdr=1&cm_mmc=Shopping%20Engine-_-Froogle-_-Home%20Solutions-_-5502594&cawelaid=349282299 ... and make sure the closet door stays closed.
Or the deal with Verizon that forced Bing on Blackberry users...
You laugh, but little brother is tossing and turning in his sleep.
Will Robert Plant drop his Aleister Crowley obsession in favor of studying the Pioneer anomaly?
That would be quite the unexplained deviation of trajectory for Mr. Plant. Whether he is unmanned or not is up for debate. Has he been doing any ED ads yet?
That's a good point, but lesson one could simply be to bring logs to class and learn how to file complete bug reports for their home hardware.
BSD more likely.
Sure, at my small office I can shout down the hall and get a pretty quick answer. This article is about the Linux kernel. Matters of scale make me averse to contacting anyone without significant research to make sure that I am not part of a DDOS on the coder who was unlucky enough to have some clever code signed off by a maintainer.
If you aren't familiar enough with the function and the relevant landscape you shouldn't be emailing kernel devs. And if the function is that clever I guarantee there is a conversation about it somewhere.
To be fair, if you are trying to get in on kernel development you probably should be able to profile the function yourself. I think the more productive approach is to research on your own until you understand the subject matter, then focus on comparative analysis such as what does this function do inefficiently, or is this function future-proof.
The point was not that open source developers should be obligated to implement everything the end users ask for, but rather that open source doesn't work the way people have been claiming for a decade.
Claims about the way that open source works? The point of the open licenses is to allow developers that work differently, have different needs and preferences or ego trips to create their own communities or go it alone.... and that is how it works.
My perception is that if a user goes through enough participation that they are recognized by the devs on the lists their feedback will usually be taken into consideration. By the time they have that recognition they have probably assisted the community in some way and they don't have to be bitching out in the cold, but can rather get their suggestions directed to the proper parties.
Fact is, even when a community has a guiding body instead of just a Maintainer that coordinates volunteers it is still better to research the history of similar requests put forth on the lists in the past, then find the devs that might actually be interested in your idea if it hasn't already been beaten to death within that community. In this scenario there is no complaining or listening to users, there is a conversation between community members that have proven themselves as such by steady participation over time.
The fact that one of the members in the conversation can't code doesn't come into play anymore because it is assumed that they will be willing to dogfood the changes, file accurate bug reports, and probably help out on lists/forums when questions come up about details of the implementation... basically there is confidence that the person doing the requesting will remain a part of the process.
Once a 'user' has done the groundwork it will be a pretty simple equation of how insightful their feedback turns out to be vs the amount of resources required to implement vs how able the developers are to add more work to their schedules. Fork at any time.
This is how it works.
I started with a marine radio receiver kit from HeathKit. Don't know if they are available anymore, but it was more engrossing than a book would have been. After that project I was able to approach the written material with some context for understanding. I guess it depends on what sort of learning method appeals to the poster.
We've known about plugin crashiness for a long time. We're just now going multi-process for this?
Translating that to FOSS speak: We've known about plugin crashiness for a long time. This problem would never be fixed if it was up to me to fix it.
The AC is probably referring to the infections that the farmed salmon have transmitted to nearby wild populations. I don't know if transmission is via escape or simple proximity, but there has been some noise about the issue.
Just like with the meat industrial complex animals, the farmed salmon require high doses of meds because of the unnatural and crowded living environment, and this has resulted in some aggressive infections for which the wild population is unprepared.
Slowdown? We won't get military support that way, therefore no funding. We smash something into it at maximum speed and let the military gather transport and devastation metrics from a collision involving speeds never before recorded by human instruments.
Then the astronomers study the ejecta, the engineers review vehicle performance metrics, the doomsday prophets rework their asteroid impact models, the cosmologists continue to try to convince their mother-in-laws that they really are cosmologists despite not knowing anything about t-zones, foundation blending, manicuring, waxing.... and no, that doesn't mean they went to a bad 'school of cosmology.'
The first section beneath the welcome section reads like this:
"New To OpenNMS? Start Here."
http://demo.opennms.org/opennms/
* username: demo
* password: demo
Much faster than reading marketing fluff.
The no transmission part kinda seems silly... They should only be handing these things out in completely dark rooms where recipients have been patted down for low light vision assist equipment. Then they need to recollect the docs before any light is allowed in or doors are opened to allow people out.
Without these precautions there is a chance the copyrighted information on the page may come into contact with visible spectrum radiation, potentially violating the no transmission clause. Imagine if someone's occular nodes were oriented in such a way to receive visible spectrum radiation that had previously contacted the copyrighted material.
Either those rubes don't understand that words printed on a page don't transmit themselves or this is entrapment by Microsoft.
Over? This thing is just beginning. Their public moves in China did not allow the regime to save face. The criticism out of Google was way too direct following the hacking incident, and it did not leave a face saving path to resolution for the Chinese Government.
By diminishing their visibility at the helm of Google they are both hardening the target and reducing the impact that their personal and now mandatory falls from grace will have on the company. Either way, someone is going to have to feel the pain for the way the China situation was handled. Better it be the millionaires and not the foot soldiers.
It is a BFD when you realize that DSE no longer feels the need to hide behind the Brin and Page flesh puppets. Prepare for the end-game... C U L8r.
Also dude, the preferred nomenclature is vaginal-space challenged.
I thought 'switcher' was the preferred nomenclature.
This would not be the first time that the government has helped/hired/worked with outside agencies to collect information that they cannot legally collect directly. My presumption would be that with updating such records about the members of InfraGuard, they can find the InfraGuard members best suited for covert information gathering of a technical nature. But that's just a guess.
My guess would be that InfraGuard is many things simultaneously, including a honey-pot. If the people coordinating these actions don't already have an in-house red team that the blue team is trying to uncover as a part of this information collection action then the program is failing. I imagine there is a lot of flushing of shit to see where it surfaces, actions designed to thresh the participant pool, actions designed to stress the oversight panels, etc...
Integrity of any distributed system is a hard thing to ensure. A network of this sort is somewhat like the financial markets in that the values of any significant subset of the system can only be estimated in real time.
Anyhow, if it is successful it will probably end up as an incubator for all sorts of nasty things, as it is the connections made between private sector participants through organizations of this sort that yield subsequent generations of tyrannical cabalistas.
+5.
Coders, bloggers, and DJ's are not the people writing the books and performing the music being pirated. My point was that those people are not well represented here, and the conversation is not balanced.
And the CNN piece was balanced? What should we do? Stop talking and let the industry mouthpieces blare on and on without counter-point? Are we supposed to wait to discuss anything until we have a quorum of vetted social commentators to guide our thoughts to socially acceptable conclusions? Fuck off.