Read the GPL. It does not ban anything. It grants rights. In this case it would have granted Edu4 the right to use other people's code had they complied with it.
It is copyright that bans what they did. And rightly so. You make it sound as if BSD-style permissions were the default and the GPL added any restrictions to that. Nope. If you grab GPL'd source the only reason you may use and distribute that code is the GPL so abiding by the rules is not a "should" but a "must".
Please mod parent up. Corporate IT is not a feel-good service wonderland for users, it is akin to physical security on the premises or to accounting: It serves the company, protects it and cleans up after the mess. While it should not deliberately get in the way of people doing their job, its responsibilities lie with the company first. Striking the right balance is very hard, but I would rather err on the side of caution and implement rules stricter than absolutely necessary. You can always tone them down afterwards if issues arise, but tightening them after people have grown accustomed to relaxed rules - and adapted their work flow to them - is neither easy nor popular.
If all else fails, you could always buy (or build) riser cards or flexible extension "cables". I would be more concerned about the amount of heat these beasts will create. You would need rather powerful cooling to run more than two in any common PC case.
[...] and don't know it is an entirely new operating system.
It is a new minor iteration of the Windows kernel with a modified Explorer shell and a few features previously only available through third-party tools. Whether that is a good or a bad thing depends on whether you like the previous iterations, but it certainly does not qualify for "entirely new operating system".
The Big Corp in media always tell us how they fight non-profit copyright infringement to help the artists, and here Sony may have been caught infringing an artist's copyright with intent to profit from it. This makes Sony's action more wrong than that of Jammie Thomas et al. on two levels: legally (because it is for profit) and morally (they screwed over the person they claimed to protect and support).
I do not take the bible as a factual account of actual events. And since I have never felt the inclination to research scientific literature on ancient yewish crimes against humanity I would not know about them. The recent behaviour of the state of Israel and the religious nuts who scream for it to wipe out everyone around their borders are enough to make me put that particular subset of yews in the same box with those other "crusaders" and a few other distinguished characters from recent history.
Do Christians etc. become better people in general? I have yet to see evidence of that. In general I have yet to hear about wide-spread bombings or progroms organised by atheists or agnostics against theists. So far Christians and Muslims are competing for a track record on violence against followers of other faiths, with jews in for a late start.
Oh, and by the way: A large number of christians does very much affirm that the Bible is to be taken by the letter. "Bible Belt" ring any bells?
Regarding the pope et al.: It does not make their preachings less dangerous and harmful, rather the opposite. And I would wager a nice sum that even among the higher ranks of Co$ most of their members actually believe all that ridiculous crap they have been spoon fed. Call it religion, call it cult - essentially it is all the same.
(Coming from an apathetic ignosticist who sees any kind of institutionalised faith as inherently dangerous.)
[...] So the problem here is that this is a brilliant optimisation for today and for pieces like the netbook market but won't be good for the desktop market long term. [...]
How is this a problem? The scheduler supposedly (I did not test it) works well for the current situation, so it should be looked into and used if it holds up to its promises. And when the technical progress renders it outdated, it should be discarded and replaced with something better.
I would rather have a better scheduler right now and switch again in three years than put up with one which works suboptimal now and may or may not run better on future hardware.
A friend of mine studies architecture. He stores several TB in DSLR photos and renderings on his desktop machine. Another friend of mine stores all his audio CDs, DVDs and BluRays and lots of TV recordings on a little server for his HTPC, he recently reached 3TB.
They are not "standard consumers", but they are not hard-core nerds, either. Storage is so cheap to acquire (and so easy to use) that people can afford to not delete anything ever again. Whether that is sensible is a whole other point. But the result is that more people store more stuff.
Could you point me to a source for this claim? IANAL, and especially IANAPatentL, but to my understanding you cannot patent anything that has been published. It is the other way around: You patent something so you can publish it, without fear of your competitors. Otherwise you could propose a really good idea, get it established and widely used, patent it and sue world+dog.
This. When designing an intranet UI a while ago we put a dummy button onto it that was labelled "Do not click here!" and kept statistics during user evaluation. About 30 out of 50 participants clicked the damn thing.
Re: 2) Hitler's wing within the NSDAP made it rather clear that they saw everyone but themselves as unworthy of wielding any political power. It was part of both their outward propaganda and their ideological foundation. That includes non-fascist conservatives - who were not at all happy to bring the "bohemian private" (Paul von Hindenburg) into the government - and even other NSDAP members (Gregor Strasser, to name one of the most prominent examples). It must have been obvious to them that he would seize any opportunity to extend his influence. Hitler was used as a tool against the left with the intention of discarding him afterwards (which obviously failed), but he clearly was considered dangerous even at the time. The NSDAP briefly turned down both tone and volume of their agitation when Hitler got introduced to v. Hindenburg, but they were always forthright in their intentions.
I am not an "expert" by any standard, either, but the Third Reich was an emphasis in my history major.
The thing that annoys me is people who seem to think that they have a right to keep a photo from appearing online just because they appear in it. [...]
At least in Germany people actually do have such a right (no english article linked, so I assume such a right does not exist in anglo-american law). Besides, for me courtesy demands that I ask people for permission before I put pictures of them online. What seems harmless to you may get another person fired, disgraced or harrassed.
Not to mention that IPv6 has no security whatsoever in its design. Any form of encryption is either a bolt on, or goes on a higher layer, such as how SSL and SSH ride on top of TCP. On the IP layer, there isn't any standard form of encryption.
Not trying to troll, but what do you need encryption on such a low layer for? I prefer managing this on the protocol or application layer so I can always use the appropriate level and form of encryption.
Of course, we all know about IPv6 and NATs. If you want to hide your internal network, you put it on IPv4. Which means on a "pure" IPv6 network an attacker can easily nmap every single box on your private network [...]
There is nothing to stop you from filtering incoming connections at your router/firewall. This has nothing to do with NAT.
IPv6 was thought out by people who have -zero- clue about security and the scumbags that IT people battle against on a daily basis. [...]
I do not think that the IP layer is the appropriate place for dealing with most of these threats. How would you solve the attacks that you mentioned - POD and so on - on this layer?
The more stuff you pack into one layer the more complex and therefore more inefficient and more vulnerable it becomes.
Remember MSN Music, the Yahoo! Music Store, the Walmart music DRM disaster and the row around Zune and PlaysForSure? Servers are turned off, established formats are phased out to push the next generation of a platform, and in many cases only a major PR debacle brings the companies to reason.
While you are correct for the situation where everyone wants to play the same game with or against each other, this advantage goes away when those gamers want to play on their own at the same time. In most households I know every gamer who has reached their teens already needs a computer for themselves. Upgrading that to reasonably handle games makes more sense to me than to buy an extra box. Plus then the kids do not occupy the living room TV.
[...] Even if the Pirate Party did win the next Westminster election, they couldn't do much about copyright or patent law, because it is set at EU level. [...]
I would like to dispute that. Seeing how EU regulations in the past have been drafted and negotiated in closed circles comprised of national representatives, lobbyists and general morons, and combining that with the EP's rather limited ability to interfere with said process I am willing to bet that any member state has more leverage to get their will than parliament.
Slashdot Mirror
Read the GPL. It does not ban anything. It grants rights. In this case it would have granted Edu4 the right to use other people's code had they complied with it.
It is copyright that bans what they did. And rightly so. You make it sound as if BSD-style permissions were the default and the GPL added any restrictions to that. Nope. If you grab GPL'd source the only reason you may use and distribute that code is the GPL so abiding by the rules is not a "should" but a "must".
Please mod parent up. Corporate IT is not a feel-good service wonderland for users, it is akin to physical security on the premises or to accounting: It serves the company, protects it and cleans up after the mess. While it should not deliberately get in the way of people doing their job, its responsibilities lie with the company first. Striking the right balance is very hard, but I would rather err on the side of caution and implement rules stricter than absolutely necessary. You can always tone them down afterwards if issues arise, but tightening them after people have grown accustomed to relaxed rules - and adapted their work flow to them - is neither easy nor popular.
Think flight simulators. 6 displays are enough to give you a decent "cockpit".
If all else fails, you could always buy (or build) riser cards or flexible extension "cables". I would be more concerned about the amount of heat these beasts will create. You would need rather powerful cooling to run more than two in any common PC case.
Mod parent up! This could indeed be one of the most practical uses for this functionality.
[...] and don't know it is an entirely new operating system.
It is a new minor iteration of the Windows kernel with a modified Explorer shell and a few features previously only available through third-party tools. Whether that is a good or a bad thing depends on whether you like the previous iterations, but it certainly does not qualify for "entirely new operating system".
The Big Corp in media always tell us how they fight non-profit copyright infringement to help the artists, and here Sony may have been caught infringing an artist's copyright with intent to profit from it. This makes Sony's action more wrong than that of Jammie Thomas et al. on two levels: legally (because it is for profit) and morally (they screwed over the person they claimed to protect and support).
I do not take the bible as a factual account of actual events. And since I have never felt the inclination to research scientific literature on ancient yewish crimes against humanity I would not know about them. The recent behaviour of the state of Israel and the religious nuts who scream for it to wipe out everyone around their borders are enough to make me put that particular subset of yews in the same box with those other "crusaders" and a few other distinguished characters from recent history.
Do Christians etc. become better people in general? I have yet to see evidence of that. In general I have yet to hear about wide-spread bombings or progroms organised by atheists or agnostics against theists. So far Christians and Muslims are competing for a track record on violence against followers of other faiths, with jews in for a late start.
Oh, and by the way: A large number of christians does very much affirm that the Bible is to be taken by the letter. "Bible Belt" ring any bells?
Regarding the pope et al.: It does not make their preachings less dangerous and harmful, rather the opposite. And I would wager a nice sum that even among the higher ranks of Co$ most of their members actually believe all that ridiculous crap they have been spoon fed. Call it religion, call it cult - essentially it is all the same.
(Coming from an apathetic ignosticist who sees any kind of institutionalised faith as inherently dangerous.)
[...] So the problem here is that this is a brilliant optimisation for today and for pieces like the netbook market but won't be good for the desktop market long term. [...]
How is this a problem? The scheduler supposedly (I did not test it) works well for the current situation, so it should be looked into and used if it holds up to its promises. And when the technical progress renders it outdated, it should be discarded and replaced with something better.
I would rather have a better scheduler right now and switch again in three years than put up with one which works suboptimal now and may or may not run better on future hardware.
A friend of mine studies architecture. He stores several TB in DSLR photos and renderings on his desktop machine. Another friend of mine stores all his audio CDs, DVDs and BluRays and lots of TV recordings on a little server for his HTPC, he recently reached 3TB.
They are not "standard consumers", but they are not hard-core nerds, either. Storage is so cheap to acquire (and so easy to use) that people can afford to not delete anything ever again. Whether that is sensible is a whole other point. But the result is that more people store more stuff.
Sure. Just after they have ported their spyware to Linux. Which will happen during the Year of the Linux Desktop, I am sure.
Could you point me to a source for this claim? IANAL, and especially IANAPatentL, but to my understanding you cannot patent anything that has been published. It is the other way around: You patent something so you can publish it, without fear of your competitors. Otherwise you could propose a really good idea, get it established and widely used, patent it and sue world+dog.
"Except" and "accept" are both homophonic (same sound) [...]
May I ask where you come from? I would rather disagree with you on the homophony part.
In other words: Yes, the surface of your precious Macbook will be scratchfree after the fall, the harddisk will still be toast.
So? A new harddisk is cheaper than a new laptop. And since you diligently maintained your backups...
[...] "do NOT use!"
This. When designing an intranet UI a while ago we put a dummy button onto it that was labelled "Do not click here!" and kept statistics during user evaluation. About 30 out of 50 participants clicked the damn thing.
Re: 2) Hitler's wing within the NSDAP made it rather clear that they saw everyone but themselves as unworthy of wielding any political power. It was part of both their outward propaganda and their ideological foundation. That includes non-fascist conservatives - who were not at all happy to bring the "bohemian private" (Paul von Hindenburg) into the government - and even other NSDAP members (Gregor Strasser, to name one of the most prominent examples). It must have been obvious to them that he would seize any opportunity to extend his influence. Hitler was used as a tool against the left with the intention of discarding him afterwards (which obviously failed), but he clearly was considered dangerous even at the time. The NSDAP briefly turned down both tone and volume of their agitation when Hitler got introduced to v. Hindenburg, but they were always forthright in their intentions.
I am not an "expert" by any standard, either, but the Third Reich was an emphasis in my history major.
One concurrent install per license.
The thing that annoys me is people who seem to think that they have a right to keep a photo from appearing online just because they appear in it. [...]
At least in Germany people actually do have such a right (no english article linked, so I assume such a right does not exist in anglo-american law). Besides, for me courtesy demands that I ask people for permission before I put pictures of them online. What seems harmless to you may get another person fired, disgraced or harrassed.
Not to mention that IPv6 has no security whatsoever in its design. Any form of encryption is either a bolt on, or goes on a higher layer, such as how SSL and SSH ride on top of TCP. On the IP layer, there isn't any standard form of encryption.
Not trying to troll, but what do you need encryption on such a low layer for? I prefer managing this on the protocol or application layer so I can always use the appropriate level and form of encryption.
Of course, we all know about IPv6 and NATs. If you want to hide your internal network, you put it on IPv4. Which means on a "pure" IPv6 network an attacker can easily nmap every single box on your private network [...]
There is nothing to stop you from filtering incoming connections at your router/firewall. This has nothing to do with NAT.
IPv6 was thought out by people who have -zero- clue about security and the scumbags that IT people battle against on a daily basis. [...]
I do not think that the IP layer is the appropriate place for dealing with most of these threats. How would you solve the attacks that you mentioned - POD and so on - on this layer?
The more stuff you pack into one layer the more complex and therefore more inefficient and more vulnerable it becomes.
Actually it just means it comes down to the integrity of the people involved for the most part. [...]
Therefore the "Well, fuck.".
Remember MSN Music, the Yahoo! Music Store, the Walmart music DRM disaster and the row around Zune and PlaysForSure? Servers are turned off, established formats are phased out to push the next generation of a platform, and in many cases only a major PR debacle brings the companies to reason.
While you are correct for the situation where everyone wants to play the same game with or against each other, this advantage goes away when those gamers want to play on their own at the same time. In most households I know every gamer who has reached their teens already needs a computer for themselves. Upgrading that to reasonably handle games makes more sense to me than to buy an extra box. Plus then the kids do not occupy the living room TV.
[...] Even if the Pirate Party did win the next Westminster election, they couldn't do much about copyright or patent law, because it is set at EU level. [...]
I would like to dispute that. Seeing how EU regulations in the past have been drafted and negotiated in closed circles comprised of national representatives, lobbyists and general morons, and combining that with the EP's rather limited ability to interfere with said process I am willing to bet that any member state has more leverage to get their will than parliament.