Guess what ? check your link! This version is for Windows XP Embedded Edition. You know, the one that runs on Embedded devices, not home PCs.
The real MUI editions are actually sold seperatly from the normal editions. You can't just install a free update on your Windows platform and get multi-language Interface support. Read the faq :
This is actually one option that Open Source does better than Microsoft. When some of my jerk friends want to debate that Windows is just more polished, I always ask them : "Yeah, but I can get a French and English interface with a simple relogon on a per user basis in a Terminal Server mode ?". That usually shuts them up, along with the "right tool for the right job" arguments.
Of course it's hidden away and hard to find, notice how all the products on that page are EOL, and also, notice how the page is horribly out of date. That's not necesseraly the kind of information you want floating around when you're trying to suck up to the community of RedHat bashers.
Flash takes a swing at him. Peter looks at the fist coming in slow mo, doges it with this little nonchalant look, and then grins happily at what he can do now. Looks to flash again, and er...end bullet time I think.
Actually, you should rewatch that scene. When Flash first swings at him and everything goes bullet-time, notice that while everything is shown to the audience, from a fly going over head to a kid throwing a paper plane, this is not Peter's actual view point of the scene. He doesn't even turn around before dodging the punch, he just knows what's going on and dodges it. It's the same spider-sense that was in the comics.
At the end of the movie, notice how he doesn't turn around either when the Goblin's glider suddenly shoots towards him. Even though he's distracted by Osbourne's speech, he jumps out of the way at the right moment.
Again, like some other poster said, watch the trailer. This is 2 minutes long and won't cost you a thing. You'll see how he dodges the car. He never saw it coming, he just jumps out of the way.
There are other examples throughout the movie, but these are the ones I remember off the top of my head. His spider-sense isn't really changed, it's still an instinct, and sense of danger and the direction it's coming from.
Now, I know this post might sound like nit-picking, but so was your original post.
but is ANOTHER sequel to a bad movie something to look forward to?
What sequel to a bad movie are you referring to ? This story is about the Spider-Man sequel, you know, the great characterisation, the innovative twist on an old story, the great acting and The Macho Man Randy Savage as BONESAW!
Oh... right... it's trendy now to bash movies because they're mainstream. Ok, i'm sorry, Bad Mainstream Media for stealing our geek icons!! Bad bad! Spider-Man sucks since it's now popular and enjoyed by those non-geeks.
Actually, I agree this article is skimpy on the meat and is pretty much useless and filled with factual errors. However, i'd like to respond to your post
2. There is curently no dual head driver from Matrox Parhelia.
This is of course bullcrock. Matrox does have a driver for the Parhelia based cards which supports, amongst other things, dualhead configurations (and even triple head! Yes, on Linux). The second head is not accelerated however, so it might be a bit on the slow side.
3. Vmware will be too slow with this configuration do to something really useful. Especially with dual heading.
Oh please. Dualheads do not noticably affect the speed of the computer it's running on. Plus, i've run Windows installation within VMware on a P2-333 with a Linux host, all running a very good speeds and using only 288 megs of RAM (2x128 + 1x32). At work, we have a workstation that's a P3-1.0ghz and it runs 2 VMware sessions with Windows 2000 Server for tests, on a Linux host busy running most of our NOC tools. This is all nice and dandy and running along smoothly.
4. This article is either a fake or a troll.
Actually, it's not fake since it's posted there and I don't believe it's a troll since you can see a basis for something in there. It's just very badly researched and probably as never been tested in real life. This guy needs do to a lot more trials and research before he has a fully functionning NOC capable of monitoring more than the coffee machine.
Why is everyone bashing SSC ? Okay, fine, it's a corporation going after the little, defenseless contributor who most likely, didn't get paid while giving their labor away. But something you have to note, is that SSC have been running the Linux Gazette since 1996, and it was only this year that the contributors started linuxgazette.net. Check out the domain registration dates :
Domain name: LINUXGAZETTE.NET
Record Created on 12-Jul-2003.
Domain Name: LINUXGAZETTE.COM
Record created on 18-Oct-1997.
Basically, the unpaid contributors didn't like where the company was going with the product, and decide to start their own, only they used the same name. Now, IANAL, but if that is not trying to cause confusion in the market, I don't know what is. SSC is in it's right as it's been exploiting the Linux Gazette name for longer, no matter when they decided to register it as a valid trademark.
Why must the slashbots always criticized corporations. Sometimes the little guy is just being a jerk.
While the United States Constitution allows Congress to enact copyright laws, it doesn't actually require it to do so. Sharing music files over p2p could be legalized tomorrow if you could just get enough votes in Congress to repeal copyright.
Yes, we should all join in this effort to help Big Corporations to acquire GPL licensed code without having to release their modifications back to the community!!
This is great, i'm joining right now, as I have need of a TCP stack for my closed-source OS that's going to lock you all in my proprietary technologies.
Now this one is going to be hard to mod. Is it flamebait since it's pro-copyright ? Is it insightful since it's pro-open source/GPL ?
Let me put the argument differently. Suppose I steal a chocolate bar from the grocery store. The owner of that store is now worse off. Suppose I download a song by Michael Jackson. Michael Jackson is no worse off.
I bet you're the kind of guy who doesn't give Voluntary Contributions when you go to museams ? After all, they're no worse off, since you wouldn't have seen the exhibit if you had to pay for it.
For the Simpsons illiterate, this is in this episode.
Do you really think that the Troll Tech model wouldn't work as well if the Linux version were released under the BSD license?
Actually no, it wouldn't work as well, since what forces you to purchase a license of QT to link your commercial product is the fact that if you link it to the GPL version of the library, your application automagically becomes GPL. If QT was under the BSD License, nothing would prevent me from just linking my application against that version and release just the binaries to the public.
So, for TrollTech, the GPL works wonders. They provide a great set of classes to the community, and at the same time, make money from people who wish to use them to write closed source and proprietary applications.
Oh please, this as got to be the biggest piece of trite ever posted and then moderated as Informative or Insightful. This should be a troll. Go ahead and mod me down for all I care, I know slashdot doesn't like being told the truth if they don't agree with it.
Let's see what is more shared on let's say KaZaA. Do a search for a RIAA artist like.. hum.. Britney Spears. How many search results ? In just 1 search ? Not unique files, but search results (ie, how many people have the file, etc..). Now let's do a search for some independant artist, let's choose Luca Turilli (of Rhapsody fame, so it's not like he's a complete unknown). How many search results ?
See, people won't be "discovering" new artists thru P2P, since P2P is not an advertising service, but a search service. People have to know what they are looking for. So of course, as an independant artist, you could post your entire collection to KaZaA or Gnutella or whatever, but no one will ever download it if they don't know about it. When you come in and talk about how the RIAA is trying to shutdown P2P file sharing because it's trying to undermine little artists, it kind of comes off as bullshit.
I guess too many people are reading too much in their annoncement to drop the RedHat Linux product line for their RedHat Enterprise Linux Line. Also, notice that nice graphic on their front page.
watch some idiot who thinks his MacPherson-strut equipped front-wheel-drive Acura Integra with tinted windows
Just a nit-pick, but aside from maybe really old 1st generation models (which in Montreal will tend to be all rusted up and useless as transportation) there are no Acura Integras that have Macpherson struts for their suspension. You're thinking of the Acura RSX, which is more of a luxury sports coupe than an actual sport compact model.
And if you want to nit pick about the RSX being an Integra in Europe and Japan, I will just nit pick that over there, it's not an Acura:)
If I had mod points, i'm mod you down to Troll. I've had my current PC for about 5 years now (P2-333 with 192 mb RAM), and I run a modern Linux Distro (Slackware 9.0 with KDE 3.1). It's not slow, doesnt' take 10 secondes to redraw anything and best of all, I can run the newest kernel and patch up everything. For all I do (coding, e-mail/web, some office work, music/video playback) I don't even see the need for better or faster hardware.
Heck, I was running about the same setup I'm running now back on my P100 with 64 MB in the days (KDE 1.0, StarOffice 5.2, all the gnu tools, etc..). The P2 I have now is a real bomb I had bought for gaming in those days (before I was enlightened by the Console's price/upgrade cycle).
People are quick to let themselves be sold something they don't need just for penis envy. Unless you're still gaming on your PC, which is darn expensive with those 1000$ upgrades every 6 months, you basically have not needed a new PC for over 5 years like the grand-father post said.
Don't forget the Final Fantasy series for SNES...Re-releasing any of those games
But, they did re-release those games, playable on your Playstation or Playstation 2. Look for Final Fantasy Origins, Final Fantasy Chronicles and Final Fantasy Anthology. With those 3 collections, you get Final Fantasy 1-6 (except 3), all in english plus Chrono Trigger! And better yet, Final Fantasy 1 and 2 have received much needed graphical overhauls.
It doesn't say that. It says the source code distributed need not include anything that is normally distributed with the major components of the operating system on which the executable runs.
Unless Linksys were to ship an executable of the compiler, in which case the source is required, yet they do not, so it is not required. Read again that paragraph, and when you are done, read it again.
The modified compiler is not distributed with the major components of the operating system on which the executable runs.
It might be able to compile it into something. But it can't compile it into the binary which they are distributing.
It doesn't matter that the modified compiler isn't shipped since you do have GCC. On top of that, what if they compiled GPL code with Visual C++ ? Can't ship the source to the compiler and no, your last argument doesn't stand as a binary built by GCC and one with Microsoft's compiler won't be the same either.
It's simple, you have a GCC for your platform, which will compile their code for your platform. They have a GCC to compile it for their platform. No where does the GPL garantee the executable you build from their source will be the same executable they built from their source, just that the source code will be the same and the binaries, though different, will have the same fonctionnality. Read it again, one more time, and you'll see.
On top of that, if you were to get your hands on that particular devkit from Broadcom, you'd get the compiler to compile your code for it. At that precise moment, you'd be entitled to the source. But you wouldn't have to give it out to people just because you cross-compiled some GPL source. This is quite simple actually. Stop being a Troll and I guess i'll stop feeding you now.
as the GPL states, you do not need to redistribute the compiler.
The GPL does not state that.
Err.. are you at least reading what people answer in reply to your post. samhalliday already covered this, and you replied to him. Read the GPL, or better yet, i'll repaste what he pasted :
The source code for a work means the preferred form of the work for making modifications to it. For an executable work, complete source code means all the source code for all modules it contains, plus any associated interface definition files, plus the scripts used to control compilation and installation of the executable.
However, as a special exception, the source code distributed need not include anything that is normally distributed (in either source or binary form) with the major components (compiler, kernel, and so on) of the operating system on which the executable runs, unless that component itself accompanies the executable.
Now, reading lesson 101. Need not, as in doesn't have to, include compiler unless compiler accompanies the executable, or in this case, the firmware. Linksys sure as hell aren't shipping the Broadcom GCC and your Linux distribution includes the GCC which can compile their source.
So, they don't need to include the modified GCC and it's source. So, you are wrong, and you can't admit it.
However, as a special exception, the source code distributed need not include anything that is normally distributed (in either source or binary form) with the major components (compiler, kernel, and so on) of the operating system on which the executable runs, unless that component itself accompanies the executable.
The modified version of gcc is not normally distributed with the major components of the operating system on which the executable runs.
Not the modified version, but GCC is available on pretty much any version of Linux, and as the GPL states, you do not need to redistribute the compiler. And yes, even though your GCC does not support the Broadcom target, it can still build the software project in question (since this is software which is normally available on Linux).
Computers control the actual braking on your ABS brakes.
Man, those now out of work ABS brake workers must be pretty pissed off. What job can a 3 inch tall guy get ?
Err.. Videotron actually gives you a 10$ rebate if you have cable TV with them, not 20$. The other 10$ comes from a 1 year engagement with them, which you can have TV or no TV.
Re:The superiority of PHP over Perl
on
PHP Cookbook
·
· Score: 1
Before anyone gets their Perl backs up, let me point out why a good default install is important for web development: you don't always have control over the server, so you can't always get the Perl modules you want.
Ok, so I guess you don't get the chance to recompile the php module either if you really need some extra fonctionnality your webhost doesn't provide on their default PHP install.
Fun fact, if the Perl modules I need aren't available, I can always upload them to my webspace as @INC points to./ for modules. Something I can't do for PHP if I need the extra fonctionnality.
Actually you did not address the argument. There is in fact a difference between property and information. Property is inherenty scarce.
Actually I did. I did not use a property based argument, but a service based argument. Now, it would be pretty easy to say that by not paying for the service, you are in fact creating costs for the owner. This is where the idea of a movie theater comes from, where the costs of projection are the same for 2 or for 20 customers. If you make sure to enter a theater when it is not full, wether you are sitting there or not, the costs do not change for the owner.
Also, I wasn't making a pro-copyright argument nor was I debunking a anti-copyright argument, I was just showing how silly pro-piracy arguments can get. If you apply the flawed logic that software pirates sometimes to use to other no costs services, you see how silly it becomes.
This tells nothing of duration of copyrights or limitations. Only that respect of the laws and institutions is important, and cannot be pushed aside with flawed logic. I wasn't giving in anyway my own opinion on copyrights law, as anyway they wouldn't fit the US mold as I am from Canada.
Had I not been able to pirate your s/w product Foo, I would not have it to to use, and you would not have my cash. But, if use a "stolen" copy, I may, in the future, decide it is valuable enough to purchase. I will likely speak about your product to friends, who may decide to buy it. And then you'll make some money.
Ok ok, I think enough is enough. Let's, once more, bring all the arguments for pirating software to light, and let's associate them to a real world exemple.
Now, I won't use stealing material things, as it's been debunked in the past, using our good old first argument :
I'm not stealing anything physical, so the maker is not losing anything tangible. And since I wouldn't have paid for it anyway...
Good for you! Now, in the real world, let's say I don't want to pay to see Movie X (no XXX jokes please). I'll just go ahead and choose a night where the there are empty seats for a screening, and i'll sneak in. I haven't taken anything, since the seat was empty anyway, and I wouldn't have paid to be seated there.
If I pirate it at home, then i'll probably buy it in the future, or recommend it to friends, or worse yet, convince a corporation to hire me and change their entire software line to what I can do (never mind the fact they just won't hire you in the first place).
Ok, so now that i'm firmly seated in my theater seat, watching my free movie, I can now evaluate wether I want to see it again and this time pay for it or to which of my friends i'm going to recommend it, if they like this sort of crappy picture.
Now i'm sure the rent-a-cop a the movie theater is going to buy all this, especially if I use software piracy as an analogy to explain what the heck am I doing there and where the hell is my ticket.
Why didn't I use downloading movies as an exemple ? Simple :
it's not real world, you'll use the above arguments
It's not the full experience
When pirating software, you get the full package, every feature, every data file, etc... Same as going to the theater. Downloading the movie, you get a somewhat reduced experience in the lack of a monstrous sound system and gigantic screen, the as downloading a frigging demo or getting a reduced fonctionnality preview or a time limited preview.
So the moral of this story ? If software piracy is ok, then so is sneaking into movies. Who's up for "Pirates of the Carribeans" tonight ? I sure as hell ain't paying to see that!
Jesus never made anyone do anything except make a choice. Live free, or die chained.
And there I thought Mel Gibson taught us that when he defied King Ed.
Of course, you could look at it differently, Jesus created the basis for what has been the greatest legal slave ring ever created. You do as the church says, or you're branded an heretic and burned at the stake (ok ok, not anymore, but that's mostly because the church lost most of it's power).
There's always the other possibility, which I prefer, and that is that some power hungry baffoun invented the whole story to give himself power over the weaker souls by saying they would be punished if they didn't listen to the "almighty". Fear and superstition can be powerful arguments when dealing with uneducated people.
So basically, Earth is just a cotton field, and we should all just be his slaves and do anything he wants us to do. Doesn't that sound a bit like immoral things your Bible preaches against? Slavery, dictature.
Oh sorry, God can do as he wishes. How does it go again? Do as I say, don't do as I do.
Slashdot Mirror
Guess what ? check your link! This version is for Windows XP Embedded Edition. You know, the one that runs on Embedded devices, not home PCs.
The real MUI editions are actually sold seperatly from the normal editions. You can't just install a free update on your Windows platform and get multi-language Interface support. Read the faq :
Windows Server 2003, Windows XP & Windows 2000 MUI
This is actually one option that Open Source does better than Microsoft. When some of my jerk friends want to debate that Windows is just more polished, I always ask them : "Yeah, but I can get a French and English interface with a simple relogon on a per user basis in a Terminal Server mode ?". That usually shuts them up, along with the "right tool for the right job" arguments.
Of course it's hidden away and hard to find, notice how all the products on that page are EOL, and also, notice how the page is horribly out of date. That's not necesseraly the kind of information you want floating around when you're trying to suck up to the community of RedHat bashers.
*sigh* and I had good Karma...
Flash takes a swing at him. Peter looks at the fist coming in slow mo, doges it with this little nonchalant look, and then grins happily at what he can do now. Looks to flash again, and er...end bullet time I think.
Actually, you should rewatch that scene. When Flash first swings at him and everything goes bullet-time, notice that while everything is shown to the audience, from a fly going over head to a kid throwing a paper plane, this is not Peter's actual view point of the scene. He doesn't even turn around before dodging the punch, he just knows what's going on and dodges it. It's the same spider-sense that was in the comics.
At the end of the movie, notice how he doesn't turn around either when the Goblin's glider suddenly shoots towards him. Even though he's distracted by Osbourne's speech, he jumps out of the way at the right moment.
Again, like some other poster said, watch the trailer. This is 2 minutes long and won't cost you a thing. You'll see how he dodges the car. He never saw it coming, he just jumps out of the way.
There are other examples throughout the movie, but these are the ones I remember off the top of my head. His spider-sense isn't really changed, it's still an instinct, and sense of danger and the direction it's coming from.
Now, I know this post might sound like nit-picking, but so was your original post.
but is ANOTHER sequel to a bad movie something to look forward to?
What sequel to a bad movie are you referring to ? This story is about the Spider-Man sequel, you know, the great characterisation, the innovative twist on an old story, the great acting and The Macho Man Randy Savage as BONESAW!
Oh... right... it's trendy now to bash movies because they're mainstream. Ok, i'm sorry, Bad Mainstream Media for stealing our geek icons!! Bad bad! Spider-Man sucks since it's now popular and enjoyed by those non-geeks.
Actually, I agree this article is skimpy on the meat and is pretty much useless and filled with factual errors. However, i'd like to respond to your post
2. There is curently no dual head driver from Matrox Parhelia.
This is of course bullcrock. Matrox does have a driver for the Parhelia based cards which supports, amongst other things, dualhead configurations (and even triple head! Yes, on Linux). The second head is not accelerated however, so it might be a bit on the slow side.
3. Vmware will be too slow with this configuration do to something really useful. Especially with dual heading.
Oh please. Dualheads do not noticably affect the speed of the computer it's running on. Plus, i've run Windows installation within VMware on a P2-333 with a Linux host, all running a very good speeds and using only 288 megs of RAM (2x128 + 1x32). At work, we have a workstation that's a P3-1.0ghz and it runs 2 VMware sessions with Windows 2000 Server for tests, on a Linux host busy running most of our NOC tools. This is all nice and dandy and running along smoothly.
4. This article is either a fake or a troll.
Actually, it's not fake since it's posted there and I don't believe it's a troll since you can see a basis for something in there. It's just very badly researched and probably as never been tested in real life. This guy needs do to a lot more trials and research before he has a fully functionning NOC capable of monitoring more than the coffee machine.
Why is everyone bashing SSC ? Okay, fine, it's a corporation going after the little, defenseless contributor who most likely, didn't get paid while giving their labor away. But something you have to note, is that SSC have been running the Linux Gazette since 1996, and it was only this year that the contributors started linuxgazette.net. Check out the domain registration dates :
Domain name: LINUXGAZETTE.NET
Record Created on 12-Jul-2003.
Domain Name: LINUXGAZETTE.COM
Record created on 18-Oct-1997.
Basically, the unpaid contributors didn't like where the company was going with the product, and decide to start their own, only they used the same name. Now, IANAL, but if that is not trying to cause confusion in the market, I don't know what is. SSC is in it's right as it's been exploiting the Linux Gazette name for longer, no matter when they decided to register it as a valid trademark.
Why must the slashbots always criticized corporations. Sometimes the little guy is just being a jerk.
Yes, we should all join in this effort to help Big Corporations to acquire GPL licensed code without having to release their modifications back to the community!!
This is great, i'm joining right now, as I have need of a TCP stack for my closed-source OS that's going to lock you all in my proprietary technologies.
Now this one is going to be hard to mod. Is it flamebait since it's pro-copyright ? Is it insightful since it's pro-open source/GPL ?
I bet you're the kind of guy who doesn't give Voluntary Contributions when you go to museams ? After all, they're no worse off, since you wouldn't have seen the exhibit if you had to pay for it.
For the Simpsons illiterate, this is in this episode.
Do you really think that the Troll Tech model wouldn't work as well if the Linux version were released under the BSD license?
Actually no, it wouldn't work as well, since what forces you to purchase a license of QT to link your commercial product is the fact that if you link it to the GPL version of the library, your application automagically becomes GPL. If QT was under the BSD License, nothing would prevent me from just linking my application against that version and release just the binaries to the public.
So, for TrollTech, the GPL works wonders. They provide a great set of classes to the community, and at the same time, make money from people who wish to use them to write closed source and proprietary applications.
Oh please, this as got to be the biggest piece of trite ever posted and then moderated as Informative or Insightful. This should be a troll. Go ahead and mod me down for all I care, I know slashdot doesn't like being told the truth if they don't agree with it.
Let's see what is more shared on let's say KaZaA. Do a search for a RIAA artist like.. hum.. Britney Spears. How many search results ? In just 1 search ? Not unique files, but search results (ie, how many people have the file, etc..). Now let's do a search for some independant artist, let's choose Luca Turilli (of Rhapsody fame, so it's not like he's a complete unknown). How many search results ?
See, people won't be "discovering" new artists thru P2P, since P2P is not an advertising service, but a search service. People have to know what they are looking for. So of course, as an independant artist, you could post your entire collection to KaZaA or Gnutella or whatever, but no one will ever download it if they don't know about it. When you come in and talk about how the RIAA is trying to shutdown P2P file sharing because it's trying to undermine little artists, it kind of comes off as bullshit.
They have made up their minds. They are offering an Enterprise Solution with their Enterprise Linux line of products.
This line of products contains Operating Systems that are well suited for high end server use, small and mid-range server use OR, lo' and behold, Desktop use.
I guess too many people are reading too much in their annoncement to drop the RedHat Linux product line for their RedHat Enterprise Linux Line. Also, notice that nice graphic on their front page.
Which one is right for you ?
Go hug a tree hippie
Just a nit-pick, but aside from maybe really old 1st generation models (which in Montreal will tend to be all rusted up and useless as transportation) there are no Acura Integras that have Macpherson struts for their suspension. You're thinking of the Acura RSX, which is more of a luxury sports coupe than an actual sport compact model.
And if you want to nit pick about the RSX being an Integra in Europe and Japan, I will just nit pick that over there, it's not an Acura :)
If I had mod points, i'm mod you down to Troll. I've had my current PC for about 5 years now (P2-333 with 192 mb RAM), and I run a modern Linux Distro (Slackware 9.0 with KDE 3.1). It's not slow, doesnt' take 10 secondes to redraw anything and best of all, I can run the newest kernel and patch up everything. For all I do (coding, e-mail/web, some office work, music/video playback) I don't even see the need for better or faster hardware.
Heck, I was running about the same setup I'm running now back on my P100 with 64 MB in the days (KDE 1.0, StarOffice 5.2, all the gnu tools, etc..). The P2 I have now is a real bomb I had bought for gaming in those days (before I was enlightened by the Console's price/upgrade cycle).
People are quick to let themselves be sold something they don't need just for penis envy. Unless you're still gaming on your PC, which is darn expensive with those 1000$ upgrades every 6 months, you basically have not needed a new PC for over 5 years like the grand-father post said.
But, they did re-release those games, playable on your Playstation or Playstation 2. Look for Final Fantasy Origins, Final Fantasy Chronicles and Final Fantasy Anthology. With those 3 collections, you get Final Fantasy 1-6 (except 3), all in english plus Chrono Trigger! And better yet, Final Fantasy 1 and 2 have received much needed graphical overhauls.
Links : Origins, Chronicles, Anthology
Unless Linksys were to ship an executable of the compiler, in which case the source is required, yet they do not, so it is not required. Read again that paragraph, and when you are done, read it again.
It doesn't matter that the modified compiler isn't shipped since you do have GCC. On top of that, what if they compiled GPL code with Visual C++ ? Can't ship the source to the compiler and no, your last argument doesn't stand as a binary built by GCC and one with Microsoft's compiler won't be the same either.
It's simple, you have a GCC for your platform, which will compile their code for your platform. They have a GCC to compile it for their platform. No where does the GPL garantee the executable you build from their source will be the same executable they built from their source, just that the source code will be the same and the binaries, though different, will have the same fonctionnality. Read it again, one more time, and you'll see.
On top of that, if you were to get your hands on that particular devkit from Broadcom, you'd get the compiler to compile your code for it. At that precise moment, you'd be entitled to the source. But you wouldn't have to give it out to people just because you cross-compiled some GPL source. This is quite simple actually. Stop being a Troll and I guess i'll stop feeding you now.
Err.. are you at least reading what people answer in reply to your post. samhalliday already covered this, and you replied to him. Read the GPL, or better yet, i'll repaste what he pasted :
Now, reading lesson 101. Need not, as in doesn't have to, include compiler unless compiler accompanies the executable, or in this case, the firmware. Linksys sure as hell aren't shipping the Broadcom GCC and your Linux distribution includes the GCC which can compile their source. So, they don't need to include the modified GCC and it's source. So, you are wrong, and you can't admit it.
Not the modified version, but GCC is available on pretty much any version of Linux, and as the GPL states, you do not need to redistribute the compiler. And yes, even though your GCC does not support the Broadcom target, it can still build the software project in question (since this is software which is normally available on Linux).
You are wrong, and you just can't admit it.
Computers control the actual braking on your ABS brakes.
Man, those now out of work ABS brake workers must be pretty pissed off. What job can a 3 inch tall guy get ?
> Yeah, and Videotron charges $20
Err.. Videotron actually gives you a 10$ rebate if you have cable TV with them, not 20$. The other 10$ comes from a 1 year engagement with them, which you can have TV or no TV.
Ok, so I guess you don't get the chance to recompile the php module either if you really need some extra fonctionnality your webhost doesn't provide on their default PHP install.
Fun fact, if the Perl modules I need aren't available, I can always upload them to my webspace as @INC points to ./ for modules. Something I can't do for PHP if I need the extra fonctionnality.
Nice one, trolling on top of a troll.
Actually I did. I did not use a property based argument, but a service based argument. Now, it would be pretty easy to say that by not paying for the service, you are in fact creating costs for the owner. This is where the idea of a movie theater comes from, where the costs of projection are the same for 2 or for 20 customers. If you make sure to enter a theater when it is not full, wether you are sitting there or not, the costs do not change for the owner.
Also, I wasn't making a pro-copyright argument nor was I debunking a anti-copyright argument, I was just showing how silly pro-piracy arguments can get. If you apply the flawed logic that software pirates sometimes to use to other no costs services, you see how silly it becomes.
This tells nothing of duration of copyrights or limitations. Only that respect of the laws and institutions is important, and cannot be pushed aside with flawed logic. I wasn't giving in anyway my own opinion on copyrights law, as anyway they wouldn't fit the US mold as I am from Canada.
Ok ok, I think enough is enough. Let's, once more, bring all the arguments for pirating software to light, and let's associate them to a real world exemple.
Now, I won't use stealing material things, as it's been debunked in the past, using our good old first argument :
Good for you! Now, in the real world, let's say I don't want to pay to see Movie X (no XXX jokes please). I'll just go ahead and choose a night where the there are empty seats for a screening, and i'll sneak in. I haven't taken anything, since the seat was empty anyway, and I wouldn't have paid to be seated there.
Ok, so now that i'm firmly seated in my theater seat, watching my free movie, I can now evaluate wether I want to see it again and this time pay for it or to which of my friends i'm going to recommend it, if they like this sort of crappy picture.
Now i'm sure the rent-a-cop a the movie theater is going to buy all this, especially if I use software piracy as an analogy to explain what the heck am I doing there and where the hell is my ticket.
Why didn't I use downloading movies as an exemple ? Simple :
When pirating software, you get the full package, every feature, every data file, etc... Same as going to the theater. Downloading the movie, you get a somewhat reduced experience in the lack of a monstrous sound system and gigantic screen, the as downloading a frigging demo or getting a reduced fonctionnality preview or a time limited preview.
So the moral of this story ? If software piracy is ok, then so is sneaking into movies. Who's up for "Pirates of the Carribeans" tonight ? I sure as hell ain't paying to see that!
Jesus never made anyone do anything except make a choice. Live free, or die chained.
And there I thought Mel Gibson taught us that when he defied King Ed.
Of course, you could look at it differently, Jesus created the basis for what has been the greatest legal slave ring ever created. You do as the church says, or you're branded an heretic and burned at the stake (ok ok, not anymore, but that's mostly because the church lost most of it's power).
There's always the other possibility, which I prefer, and that is that some power hungry baffoun invented the whole story to give himself power over the weaker souls by saying they would be punished if they didn't listen to the "almighty". Fear and superstition can be powerful arguments when dealing with uneducated people.
we are simply doing the Lord's work on Earth.
So basically, Earth is just a cotton field, and we should all just be his slaves and do anything he wants us to do. Doesn't that sound a bit like immoral things your Bible preaches against? Slavery, dictature.
Oh sorry, God can do as he wishes. How does it go again? Do as I say, don't do as I do.