Not quite. That's maybe how RMS stills sees it, and it's surely how the big distro's still distribute it, but for a lot of these userland things, alternatives exist outside of GNU - there's tcc, which compiles the Linux kernel as well (and does it faster); there's tcsh for a shell. The old 'man' can be had from BSD and has been on the FSF's shitlist for years now anyway. Etc. etc. etc.
Off the top of my head, the only thing currenly not replaceable from GNU to run Linux is the textutils/binutils stuff and glibc (although it contains a *lot* of outside-GNU contributions) and utils ('ld' mainly). Not so big, but not quite trivial, true.
Under a no-copyright regime, you'd have to keep your proprietary code very, very secret. As in, your developers cannot copy it for their own purposes, hdds are kept in a vault etc.
I think you are wrong. There's the 'you give back' aspect that's literally in the GPL, which is what Linus likes. And there's the 'we don't like proprietary software', which _isn't_ explicitly in the GPL, but which is what RMS thinks. As such, the GPL is usable to Linus, but since he doesn't live inside the head of RMS, he doesn't have to abide by his (not the GPL's) intentions. This isn't Soviet Russia, you know. People don't have to have the ultimately correct mindset only. He thinks 'share and share alike' for what I (and others) make, and proprietary software is Ok. Those two views _can_ be combined, and they still _do_ allow you to use the GPL for what you've wrought.
Did you prepare that statement with the functioncall to the sequence. If not, why not ? The sequence functioncall address has to be precompiled for it to be comparable with what mysql does. Also, are you sure you did use 'int' for your primary key in postgres (and not 'number' or 'serial' ?) Did you try to turn autocommit off with postgres and then commit every 1000 inserts ? If not, why not - every serious database loader does it like that.
The problem with this approach is that there are many ways the say the same thing, and that this compression/decompression algorithm is tested using strict text-comparison only. A real AI might compress 'The sky is blue today' and decompress to 'Today it's beatiful weather' and not be wrong.
It depends on your language, I suppose - OO languages brought globals back (in a way) big time ! It's very difficult to examine even the shortest function to find a variable that you can't see being part of the parameter list or being declared somewhere in the function if you do (especially) C++. Is it a global ? Is it part of the class ? Is it part of one of the superclasses ? GUI IDEs go a long way to finding it, but it _does_ mean a context switch for a programmer. To avoid these situations (and where they do occur, prefix with 'this->') is best. And secondly, I find that really long variable names tend to produce a blur in my mind - I don't read to the end, and subtle differences between two can be hard to trace.
The origin of this post isn't that 80 columns on a terminal don't fit new code - it's some intern's Eclipse code, full of tabbed indentation and java.foo.bar myFooBarObject = new java.foo.bar(someInstanceIStupidlyNamedThis, someInstanceIStupidlyNamedThat); kind-a-code, that they want to give back to a real programmer, who can't fit it on his terminal. Guess what - you could have specified that the code can only be viewed in GUI-driven IDEs, or you could have deviated (oh the nerve!) from Sun's coding standards and use two spaces instead. And for the love of God, stop giving your variables names of 30 characters long that can really only be safely typed with some form of machine-driven autocompletion ! The rules are simple; use small functions with only three levels of indentation (max). That way your variables can be small too, since they don't have to describe the whole world. *Don't use tabs*. And everything will fit perfectly in 80 columns.
1920 watthour in 4kg; I have no idea whether it's doable, but I do know that every battery suffers greatly when the temperature changes. They'll probably test this in Arizona, and come up really, really short when it'll be properly needed in Alaska. But that's just the cynic in me.
What is it that you don't understand ? That lawyers have to represent people, even reprehensible people, to the best of their abilities ? That they have to be able to do so in a rather privileged 'cocoon' ? That it can't be allowed that the opposite party has knowledge about the details of the communication between the lawyer and the client ? Even if that opposite party is the executive force ? What do you not understand about a situation that has existed for over two thousand years ?
The appeals court ruled that the plaintiffs could not sue because they can't prove they were affected by the program, and at the same time, ruled that details about the program, including who was targeted, are state secrets.
Which is all true. So they should have chosen a better angle under which to file a complaint. Either find someone affected, or argue convincingly that such state secrets are unconstitutional. Should be a breeze given the current make up of the supreme court.
Otherwise, just put your money in the bank and wait until after 2008.
Am I the only one who thinks that he should have been escorted out of the building by the bouncer, after having erased his tape/static ramdisk, and be blacklisted ? I mean, that's how it used to go.
More like those little engineering companies that do various odd jobs for whoever pays them. I used to work at one of those - long before I was an IT person; blue collar & jeans, roll-up cigarettes and smelling of the soldering iron, paint, welding and metal greese. Sorry, but I stacked a prepared batch of whatever-they-do-boxes on your desk today. Got a few bits of electronic wire sticking out of a breast pocket somewhere. Got calender girls on the wall. Only men work here.
Contrast with today, as an IT person, I work for an all out IT company, only men, blue collar, jeans. Cigarettes have been outlawed, but somebody is still using that soldering iron. And a compressor. Got a USB stick hanging around me somewhere. Got transformer logos on the wall. Only men work here. We work for whoever pays us. What's changed ?
Just make an institution that wants to verify you, send you cut-outs of faces of several hundreds of family pictures that you've taken over the years. The pictures should be analog and old, so that they won't have been on a facebook-like site. Also, have them make you write a random story, in pen, the individual sentennces of which will be presented back to you. Mix everything up with everything else, distort a little, and present back to the user when they want to log in. Postfix with user-chosen password and small-device based challenge-response. Separate actions with separate verifications. Should all in all take almost half an hour now, but verified you are !
*reading it again* - no - he never said *financial* gain. Unlawful gain != unlawful financial gain. Impersonating a police officer may not have financial gain in mind - so you're right, but he never said that. You're splitting hairs while putting words into other people's mouths, my friend. And you may even have done so on purpose. That's a double penalty.
Probably not, if he wants to reproduce, or grow hair, or smell something, or stop bleeding, or avoid cancer, or avoid his white bloodcells attacking him.
The first crusade was in 1099. Islam was 1099 years old in 1731. In 1731, the Ottoman empire was on decline. Think about it - such parallels are useless.
The problem with implanted RFIDs is that it turns people into keys, making the 'kidnap the bankmanager the night before the heist' scenario all the more likely and attractive. Before, they would have to steal my keys, now they have to steal me.
The deal is retroactive and future immunity from lawsuits alleging infringement on registered innovations, reciprocaly. And it doesn't get anymore specific than that. It's essentially a line in the sand, and the one that is suspected of having less leverage, gets less territory, or pays more. It's not specific because future innovations cannot yet be specified, nor can the situations be specified wherein, in the present, people find each other at each other's throats legally. This is why they make a deal. They promise not to sue. Or, if you're MS, it's more like: you give me your lunch money and I promise I won't beat you up.
That is, if you look at the source. Man, for such a simple page they sure use an enormous amount of tage. If this is what the future looks like, I want the past back !
Plan 9 looks to me like the perennial contender for something which is never to be released; much like the HURD (although I think the HURD is more like a search in the wrong direction altogether; I mean, if you're going to do it all afresh - why use UNIX ?). I imagine a bunch of Wozniaks tinkering about all day without any impatient Jobses looking over their shoulder scheming to make a buck. Then I read their website again, and I knew for sure they must be out of their minds at bit: THEY BROUGHT ALONG 'ED' !!
Slashdot Mirror
Not quite. That's maybe how RMS stills sees it, and it's surely how the big distro's still distribute it, but for a lot of these userland things, alternatives exist outside of GNU - there's tcc, which compiles the Linux kernel as well (and does it faster); there's tcsh for a shell. The old 'man' can be had from BSD and has been on the FSF's shitlist for years now anyway. Etc. etc. etc.
Off the top of my head, the only thing currenly not replaceable from GNU to run Linux is the textutils/binutils stuff and glibc (although it contains a *lot* of outside-GNU contributions) and utils ('ld' mainly). Not so big, but not quite trivial, true.
Under a no-copyright regime, you'd have to keep your proprietary code very, very secret. As in, your developers cannot copy it for their own purposes, hdds are kept in a vault etc.
There's jalapeno. I'm not going to link it. You google it.
I think you are wrong. There's the 'you give back' aspect that's literally in the GPL, which is what Linus likes. And there's the 'we don't like proprietary software', which _isn't_ explicitly in the GPL, but which is what RMS thinks. As such, the GPL is usable to Linus, but since he doesn't live inside the head of RMS, he doesn't have to abide by his (not the GPL's) intentions. This isn't Soviet Russia, you know. People don't have to have the ultimately correct mindset only. He thinks 'share and share alike' for what I (and others) make, and proprietary software is Ok. Those two views _can_ be combined, and they still _do_ allow you to use the GPL for what you've wrought.
Did you prepare that statement with the functioncall to the sequence. If not, why not ? The sequence functioncall address has to be precompiled for it to be comparable with what mysql does. Also, are you sure you did use 'int' for your primary key in postgres (and not 'number' or 'serial' ?) Did you try to turn autocommit off with postgres and then commit every 1000 inserts ? If not, why not - every serious database loader does it like that.
The problem with this approach is that there are many ways the say the same thing, and that this compression/decompression algorithm is tested using strict text-comparison only. A real AI might compress 'The sky is blue today' and decompress to 'Today it's beatiful weather' and not be wrong.
It depends on your language, I suppose - OO languages brought globals back (in a way) big time ! It's very difficult to examine even the shortest function to find a variable that you can't see being part of the parameter list or being declared somewhere in the function if you do (especially) C++. Is it a global ? Is it part of the class ? Is it part of one of the superclasses ? GUI IDEs go a long way to finding it, but it _does_ mean a context switch for a programmer. To avoid these situations (and where they do occur, prefix with 'this->') is best. And secondly, I find that really long variable names tend to produce a blur in my mind - I don't read to the end, and subtle differences between two can be hard to trace.
The origin of this post isn't that 80 columns on a terminal don't fit new code - it's some intern's Eclipse code, full of tabbed indentation and java.foo.bar myFooBarObject = new java.foo.bar(someInstanceIStupidlyNamedThis, someInstanceIStupidlyNamedThat); kind-a-code, that they want to give back to a real programmer, who can't fit it on his terminal. Guess what - you could have specified that the code can only be viewed in GUI-driven IDEs, or you could have deviated (oh the nerve!) from Sun's coding standards and use two spaces instead. And for the love of God, stop giving your variables names of 30 characters long that can really only be safely typed with some form of machine-driven autocompletion ! The rules are simple; use small functions with only three levels of indentation (max). That way your variables can be small too, since they don't have to describe the whole world. *Don't use tabs*. And everything will fit perfectly in 80 columns.
1920 watthour in 4kg; I have no idea whether it's doable, but I do know that every battery suffers greatly when the temperature changes. They'll probably test this in Arizona, and come up really, really short when it'll be properly needed in Alaska. But that's just the cynic in me.
What is it that you don't understand ? That lawyers have to represent people, even reprehensible people, to the best of their abilities ? That they have to be able to do so in a rather privileged 'cocoon' ? That it can't be allowed that the opposite party has knowledge about the details of the communication between the lawyer and the client ? Even if that opposite party is the executive force ? What do you not understand about a situation that has existed for over two thousand years ?
The appeals court ruled that the plaintiffs could not sue because they can't prove they were affected by the program, and at the same time, ruled that details about the program, including who was targeted, are state secrets.
Which is all true. So they should have chosen a better angle under which to file a complaint. Either find someone affected, or argue convincingly that such state secrets are unconstitutional. Should be a breeze given the current make up of the supreme court.
Otherwise, just put your money in the bank and wait until after 2008.
Am I the only one who thinks that he should have been escorted out of the building by the bouncer, after having erased his tape/static ramdisk, and be blacklisted ? I mean, that's how it used to go.
More like those little engineering companies that do various odd jobs for whoever pays them. I used to work at one of those - long before I was an IT person; blue collar & jeans, roll-up cigarettes and smelling of the soldering iron, paint, welding and metal greese. Sorry, but I stacked a prepared batch of whatever-they-do-boxes on your desk today. Got a few bits of electronic wire sticking out of a breast pocket somewhere. Got calender girls on the wall. Only men work here.
Contrast with today, as an IT person, I work for an all out IT company, only men, blue collar, jeans. Cigarettes have been outlawed, but somebody is still using that soldering iron. And a compressor. Got a USB stick hanging around me somewhere. Got transformer logos on the wall. Only men work here. We work for whoever pays us. What's changed ?
Just make an institution that wants to verify you, send you cut-outs of faces of several hundreds of family pictures that you've taken over the years. The pictures should be analog and old, so that they won't have been on a facebook-like site. Also, have them make you write a random story, in pen, the individual sentennces of which will be presented back to you. Mix everything up with everything else, distort a little, and present back to the user when they want to log in. Postfix with user-chosen password and small-device based challenge-response. Separate actions with separate verifications. Should all in all take almost half an hour now, but verified you are !
No, he meant standard vs. imperial.
*reading it again* - no - he never said *financial* gain. Unlawful gain != unlawful financial gain. Impersonating a police officer may not have financial gain in mind - so you're right, but he never said that. You're splitting hairs while putting words into other people's mouths, my friend. And you may even have done so on purpose. That's a double penalty.
Probably not, if he wants to reproduce, or grow hair, or smell something, or stop bleeding, or avoid cancer, or avoid his white bloodcells attacking him.
The first crusade was in 1099. Islam was 1099 years old in 1731. In 1731, the Ottoman empire was on decline. Think about it - such parallels are useless.
The problem with implanted RFIDs is that it turns people into keys, making the 'kidnap the bankmanager the night before the heist' scenario all the more likely and attractive. Before, they would have to steal my keys, now they have to steal me.
The deal is retroactive and future immunity from lawsuits alleging infringement on registered innovations, reciprocaly. And it doesn't get anymore specific than that. It's essentially a line in the sand, and the one that is suspected of having less leverage, gets less territory, or pays more. It's not specific because future innovations cannot yet be specified, nor can the situations be specified wherein, in the present, people find each other at each other's throats legally. This is why they make a deal. They promise not to sue. Or, if you're MS, it's more like: you give me your lunch money and I promise I won't beat you up.
That is, if you look at the source. Man, for such a simple page they sure use an enormous amount of tage. If this is what the future looks like, I want the past back !
Plan 9 looks to me like the perennial contender for something which is never to be released; much like the HURD (although I think the HURD is more like a search in the wrong direction altogether; I mean, if you're going to do it all afresh - why use UNIX ?). I imagine a bunch of Wozniaks tinkering about all day without any impatient Jobses looking over their shoulder scheming to make a buck. Then I read their website again, and I knew for sure they must be out of their minds at bit: THEY BROUGHT ALONG 'ED' !!
Not to nitpick, but wasn't that during a time when die-hard conservatives associated themselves more with the democratic party ?
Tellus ? Is that Terra, as in Earth ? Did I miss something ?
This whole thing has been done over and over again in my very European country. Reference.