Especially considering that a company trying to pilfer GPLed code will themselves have an onerous, all your base, your soul is mine type EULA of their own.
Seriously, if someone pulled even HALF the crap with apple, that apple is pulling with VLC, apple would crucify them.
Parents *do* have the authority to give orders to their children. In fact, disobeying those orders can in some places be a criminal offense.
Since parents possess this authority, they have a responsibility to exercise it appropriately, and that includes properly supervising their children.
In my case, I would fine my child the value of the vase and make them work it off. They are responsible for it because they disobeyed a direct order from me not to run in the house, which means they are automatically at fault (negligent per se) because their disobedience was the proximate cause of the vase breaking.
And I would still punish them for disobedience on top of that, because they don't get a free pass on insubordination just because they did something else wrong that merits punishment.
If you run a red light, and wind up causing an accident because of it, your running the red light puts you at fault for negligently violating traffic regulations, and you still get a ticket for running it.
It was not an accident, precisely because they willfully disobeyed my orders.
In fact, someone I know recently had this happen to them.
She grounded them for running, docked their allowance to cover the jar they broke, and threatened further sanctions for sassing when they decided to try to mouth off about it. They paid up, didn't argue, and got a valuable lesson in doing what they are told.
I think parental supervision should be a case of strict liability.
Your kid does something, you are responsible for it period, at least as far as civil matters go.
Anything beyond that is between parent and child.
Parents already have de-facto omnipotent authority over their own children anyway until they are legal adults. Enough that I would consider children to be agents of their parents, at least as far as liability goes.
IE6 conveniently breaks Web 2.0 stuff like youtube, facebook, and a lot of other stuff that PHBs simply do not want their employees accessing on the job.
Thing is by controlling the media the corporations have the politicians by the balls, since they determine who gets air time during election season.
Pissing off (or failing to kiss up to) a corporation that is exposing you to your voters is political suicide.
And self incorporation doesn't work.
The same corporations that control the media also don't much care for small fry on their turf, and they regularly can and do litigate their competition into oblivion. It is a legal jungle out there, where survival of the fittest reigns.
0-2G is local memory 2-3G is global memory, for stuff like GDI and USER and KERNEL. Every process sees the same window between 2 and 3G 3-4G is kernel memory.
Slashdot Mirror
Why shouldn't it be?
If someone's too stupid to keep money away from the lotto, then they really shouldn't be in charge of the money in the first place.
The only problem with "parting a fool from his money" is that it often winds up in evil pockets.
The real world is a far cry from the "frictionless vaccuum" often cited in mathematical problems.
The most important difference IMHO is the presence of intelligent agents with a vested interest in influencing reality to their own benefit.
Which is why it's often profitable to skew probabilities in favor of malicious or artificial interference with an otherwise perfectly random process.
Not to mention that someone can always frame you with some clever hacking.
If someone can plant kiddie porn on your PC, imagine how easy it will be to plant it on your FB account.
Quite true.
Especially considering that a company trying to pilfer GPLed code will themselves have an onerous, all your base, your soul is mine type EULA of their own.
Seriously, if someone pulled even HALF the crap with apple, that apple is pulling with VLC, apple would crucify them.
Apple is part of the problem because they are cooperating with the enemy in this case.
Don't blame me, I'm too busy working my ass off trying to make ends meet to risk pissing off my corporate overlords and winding up on the streets.
-- Joe Sixpack
Precisely.
Parents *do* have the authority to give orders to their children. In fact, disobeying those orders can in some places be a criminal offense.
Since parents possess this authority, they have a responsibility to exercise it appropriately, and that includes properly supervising their children.
In my case, I would fine my child the value of the vase and make them work it off. They are responsible for it because they disobeyed a direct order from me not to run in the house, which means they are automatically at fault (negligent per se) because their disobedience was the proximate cause of the vase breaking.
And I would still punish them for disobedience on top of that, because they don't get a free pass on insubordination just because they did something else wrong that merits punishment.
If you run a red light, and wind up causing an accident because of it, your running the red light puts you at fault for negligently violating traffic regulations, and you still get a ticket for running it.
It was not an accident, precisely because they willfully disobeyed my orders.
In fact, someone I know recently had this happen to them.
She grounded them for running, docked their allowance to cover the jar they broke, and threatened further sanctions for sassing when they decided to try to mouth off about it. They paid up, didn't argue, and got a valuable lesson in doing what they are told.
I think parental supervision should be a case of strict liability.
Your kid does something, you are responsible for it period, at least as far as civil matters go.
Anything beyond that is between parent and child.
Parents already have de-facto omnipotent authority over their own children anyway until they are legal adults. Enough that I would consider children to be agents of their parents, at least as far as liability goes.
I think organizations rather like having a browser that screws up social networking.
IE6 conveniently breaks Web 2.0 stuff like youtube, facebook, and a lot of other stuff that PHBs simply do not want their employees accessing on the job.
It's brokenness is a feature in this case.
A human still has to program the sucker.
And I would much rather have a human I could watch and monitor than an AI concealed in an opaque chip that I would just have to trust implicitly.
I barely trust people as it is even when I can watch them.
I would rather say you are optimistic, because this is positively rosy compared to how the future is going to wind up.
Thing is by controlling the media the corporations have the politicians by the balls, since they determine who gets air time during election season.
Pissing off (or failing to kiss up to) a corporation that is exposing you to your voters is political suicide.
And self incorporation doesn't work.
The same corporations that control the media also don't much care for small fry on their turf, and they regularly can and do litigate their competition into oblivion. It is a legal jungle out there, where survival of the fittest reigns.
I consider it malicious to be so profit driven that you willfully neglect the care required to avoid such foulups in the first place.
Tech fuckups happen, but it's still evil (tm) to just turn a blind eye and whistle innocently until someone complains about it.
That's easy enough to resolve.
Be a good programmer and don't make naive assumptions about types.
What I'd like to know is who shorted the airline stocks just before 9/11.
And which sick bastard cared more about profiting from 9/11.
Or they could just sue you in all 50 states simultaneously.
Sony did something like this in Europe.
Please, think of the children!
According to relativity, you never know if your absolute position is changing or not, or even if there is such a thing as absolute position.
So if you time travel, whose reference frame do you use to advance yourself in time while remaining static in position?
The MAFIAA is all about having bigger legal guns.
They aren't afraid to extract settlements from dead people they sue by "accident"
Thing is, to make a "derived work" in the patent realm, you need a license for the patent you're deriving from.
I'd much rather hold the examiner *personally* liable.
If not completely, then enough to sting. ...
Who the hell am I kidding? The USPTO is bought and paid for just like every other branch of government.
Which they are liable to do and you could probably be called out before you scuttle back to the baseline.
Where are the constraints?
You can be called out if you stray too far from the base line.
0-2G is local memory
2-3G is global memory, for stuff like GDI and USER and KERNEL. Every process sees the same window between 2 and 3G
3-4G is kernel memory.