If I need to use a Java program, and the JVM is not open, then I lack control over a significant portion of my computer and work. This is a bad thing and an immoral thing. I will welcome a free-software JVM.
Possibly, but you don't distribute the running program, so it is totally irrelevant. Anyway, IMHO, the result of dynamic linking is mere amalgamation - The only effect that doesn't appear to be amalgamation is the precise nature of transient data that is created as a result of the interaction of the two codebases. Since that is not an artistic unity (but rather is a systematic unity), I fail to see how it can be considered derivative art. A computer cannot make art through routine system operation with no particular care put in to creating it. So, eg, a company that provides a service by running a GPL program with a non-GPL class library then sending a JVM core image over the network after the hefty calculations are done would not be distributing a derivative work. Anybody could make the same core image through routine operation - it just might take longer for their weaker CPUs to produce the same image.
The problem is they are building on top of commodity hardware, with the only advantage being the software. A competitive market has no room for openness. In such a market, every dollar you grow is a dollar that your competition shrinks. You don't want that to happen the other way around. For everything you do that helps your competitor, your competitor grows a little faster. That means you grow a little slower or shrink.
Embedded consumer entertainment appliances are a very, very competitive market. That's why prices are so low, and there are so many small players. All those niche's have converged to one market leaving it over-crowded and over-supplied. Nobody can be expected to give up their share of that market without at least a fight.
What if another feature is valued highly? Developers would be encouraged to produce lower-quality software in order to claim the bounty. That could make it difficult to work in other features.
That is why so much commercial software is so poor.
GPL does not try to infringe on this right. If your country permits you to do it with books, movies, and songs, your country permits you to do it with GPL software. IE, if you get a fedora cd, you can sell it on to somebody else. Simple.
You don't accept the restrictions. The law says you are fully restricted by default. The GPL is a promise from the copyright owner to not take any action against you for some specific redistribution of a certain form (they give you license to redistribute in some specified manner). So the law no-longer stops you from distribution in that certain manner. The law in every country that signed up to the berne convention says that you cannot just do what you wish with copyrighted work. eg, a book.
To copy/redistribute/etc a work in a manner restricted by copyright law that you have not been granted license to do, is known colloquially as "piracy".
If you buy a peice of commercial software, they grant some right to copy. If you get a peice of GPL software, they grant shitloads of rights to copy. If you get something that is covered by copyright with no notice of terms for copying, you have *no right to copy*. Where are your rights of first sale there?
By default you cannot do *anything* with a copyrighted work but hang the media it came on onto your living room wall. The commercial guys let you load it onto a computer, the GPL guys let you do just about anything with it as long as for some of those things you provide source (or offer of source), and you offer it on under the same terms.
If there is something for your clothing to catch on, I seriously soubt there will be an airtight seal to make the elevator move. You need really smooth edges to get an airtight seal.
> However, bullets are made of lead. Lead DOES NOT spark.
And nor does copper. That's why hammers used where there is a possibility of flammable gas leaks such as a natural gas power station are made with heads.
Re:My first exposure to list ( and a mirror of boo
on
Practical Common Lisp
·
· Score: 1
> Haskell has significant whitespace, like Python. Lisp doesn't.
Significant whitespace in Haskell is optional. If you miss out the braces, the compiler "inserts" them according to the whitespace. If you put them in in the first place, whitespace doesn't matter.
Running Windows XP here on 800MHz and 256 Meg of RAM. Slow as a dog. I've even gone through and sorted out all the Run and RunOnce scripts, and a load of unnecessary services. The HP printer driver is probably a bit of an issue though. Anti-Virus is not a problem (very, very fast) - can't say which though, its my employer and I'm still on probation, so I don't want to use their trademark without explicit permission.
All your own revision history that cannot be obtained by any other means (and couldn't be even before BitMover pulled the free BK). Tridge is just giving BK users access to their own data.
if(a!=1){/* if a isn't equal to one */ a++;/* increment a */ x+=a-1;/* add the old value of a onto x */ foo( x);/* foo is a function, call it passing the value of x */ }/* end of if (a!= 1) block */
I have seen code like that from inexperienced coders because their tutor's slides explained what each line does in a comment and they thought that's what you're supposed to do. They also thought that indentation and whitespace was done in the slides because the tutor fancied it.
Note to programming course tutors. *DO* *NOT* explain how code snippets work using comments. *DO* demonstrate *proper* use of comments and explain indentation and other whitespace, and exactly why you thought it was best to indent as you did.
It was a serious suggestion. A stable ABI needs somebody to do the work and ensure it is unchanging and always available. The OP wants it, the OP should just go ahead and do it.
With regards to kernel bloat, the minimal kernel is very unbloated. The rest is just drivers. The recent increases in size are due to cleaner driver models and better VM/Scheduler which are a benefit to everybody (especially big iron with lots of users). Then there are drivers and ports on top - but they aren't bloat since they don't have to be compiled, or they can be compiled as separate projects into modules. IMHO, with initramfs, the kernel should soon start to make more and more stuff modularised and more code will then be shared - this will be very very good.
That's easy, you can do it for us. Just specify a general and fast binary interface for drivers, and implement and compile it as a module for each kernel as it is released. Then third parties just write to your interface and users load your interface and the third party modules. See? So come on then. Get working on it for the rest of us.
That is, after all, what has to be done to acheive the effect you're asking for. It just needs somebody to commit their time to it. That person is you.
If the file or file segment is bigger than the hash, then yes. A one byte hash can represent 256 different values. A two byte file can represent 256 times as many values. On average then, there are 256 two byte files for each hash value.
Re:Chemists, not physicists
on
Quantum Wires
·
· Score: 1
No-no, Biology is a specific form of colouring in.
The issue with that is the heat and die area for clock distribution over what would be simply a much larger HT CPU. The dual core approach avoids massive increases in heat dissipation and die area and essentially introduces synchronisation at the memory interface. This is the first step on the way to clockless CPUs, which is when you will see what you just wished for.
Technically, they also degrade more gracefully (as they go out one by one, and the signal keeps shining). Unfortunately, the circuitry to make them appear to be a halogen lamp from the perspective of the controller's LMU (Lamp Monitoring Unit) has a tendency to blow its fuse, causing the effect of a single lamp out very frequently. Perhaps when the controllers are designed for LED signals from the ground up they will *actually* be cost-effective. Currently the labour to frequently attend site to replace those fuses is costly.
Moore's law has stuck around for forty years in the same way that my pet hampster lived for ten years. It died but got replaced by something similar with the same name and nobody noticed.
There is something I missed off... It should be scaleable wrt history size, so you don't have to have separate histories for each year (which is the recommended practise with arch). It should also not impose such a silly naming policy.
Slashdot Mirror
If I need to use a Java program, and the JVM is not open, then I lack control over a significant portion of my computer and work. This is a bad thing and an immoral thing. I will welcome a free-software JVM.
Possibly, but you don't distribute the running program, so it is totally irrelevant. Anyway, IMHO, the result of dynamic linking is mere amalgamation - The only effect that doesn't appear to be amalgamation is the precise nature of transient data that is created as a result of the interaction of the two codebases. Since that is not an artistic unity (but rather is a systematic unity), I fail to see how it can be considered derivative art. A computer cannot make art through routine system operation with no particular care put in to creating it. So, eg, a company that provides a service by running a GPL program with a non-GPL class library then sending a JVM core image over the network after the hefty calculations are done would not be distributing a derivative work. Anybody could make the same core image through routine operation - it just might take longer for their weaker CPUs to produce the same image.
I agree, I was responding to the question of why they don't *want* to join in the community.
The problem is they are building on top of commodity hardware, with the only advantage being the software. A competitive market has no room for openness. In such a market, every dollar you grow is a dollar that your competition shrinks. You don't want that to happen the other way around. For everything you do that helps your competitor, your competitor grows a little faster. That means you grow a little slower or shrink.
Embedded consumer entertainment appliances are a very, very competitive market. That's why prices are so low, and there are so many small players. All those niche's have converged to one market leaving it over-crowded and over-supplied. Nobody can be expected to give up their share of that market without at least a fight.
What if another feature is valued highly? Developers would be encouraged to produce lower-quality software in order to claim the bounty. That could make it difficult to work in other features.
That is why so much commercial software is so poor.
No it isn't. First sale lets you sell that original CD, full stop. You can't sell a book along with a photocopy with lots of changes either.
GPL does not try to infringe on this right. If your country permits you to do it with books, movies, and songs, your country permits you to do it with GPL software. IE, if you get a fedora cd, you can sell it on to somebody else. Simple.
You don't accept the restrictions. The law says you are fully restricted by default. The GPL is a promise from the copyright owner to not take any action against you for some specific redistribution of a certain form (they give you license to redistribute in some specified manner). So the law no-longer stops you from distribution in that certain manner. The law in every country that signed up to the berne convention says that you cannot just do what you wish with copyrighted work. eg, a book.
To copy/redistribute/etc a work in a manner restricted by copyright law that you have not been granted license to do, is known colloquially as "piracy".
If you buy a peice of commercial software, they grant some right to copy. If you get a peice of GPL software, they grant shitloads of rights to copy. If you get something that is covered by copyright with no notice of terms for copying, you have *no right to copy*. Where are your rights of first sale there?
By default you cannot do *anything* with a copyrighted work but hang the media it came on onto your living room wall. The commercial guys let you load it onto a computer, the GPL guys let you do just about anything with it as long as for some of those things you provide source (or offer of source), and you offer it on under the same terms.
If anything stops the nonsense I hear about in America it will be parents. Mothers are a force to be reckoned with.
If there is something for your clothing to catch on, I seriously soubt there will be an airtight seal to make the elevator move. You need really smooth edges to get an airtight seal.
> However, bullets are made of lead. Lead DOES NOT spark.
And nor does copper. That's why hammers used where there is a possibility of flammable gas leaks such as a natural gas power station are made with heads.
> Haskell has significant whitespace, like Python. Lisp doesn't.
Significant whitespace in Haskell is optional. If you miss out the braces, the compiler "inserts" them according to the whitespace. If you put them in in the first place, whitespace doesn't matter.
Running Windows XP here on 800MHz and 256 Meg of RAM. Slow as a dog. I've even gone through and sorted out all the Run and RunOnce scripts, and a load of unnecessary services. The HP printer driver is probably a bit of an issue though. Anti-Virus is not a problem (very, very fast) - can't say which though, its my employer and I'm still on probation, so I don't want to use their trademark without explicit permission.
> I remember seeing those "What's wrong with this program?" ads with C++ examples and being utterly confused.
Q: "What's wrong with this program?"
A: "It's written in C++."
All your own revision history that cannot be obtained by any other means (and couldn't be even before BitMover pulled the free BK). Tridge is just giving BK users access to their own data.
I think he means stuff like:
/* if a isn't equal to one */ /* increment a */ /* add the old value of a onto x */ /* foo is a function, call it passing the value of x */ /* end of if (a!= 1) block */
if(a!=1){
a++;
x+=a-1;
foo( x);
}
I have seen code like that from inexperienced coders because their tutor's slides explained what each line does in a comment and they thought that's what you're supposed to do. They also thought that indentation and whitespace was done in the slides because the tutor fancied it.
Note to programming course tutors. *DO* *NOT* explain how code snippets work using comments. *DO* demonstrate *proper* use of comments and explain indentation and other whitespace, and exactly why you thought it was best to indent as you did.
It was a serious suggestion. A stable ABI needs somebody to do the work and ensure it is unchanging and always available. The OP wants it, the OP should just go ahead and do it.
With regards to kernel bloat, the minimal kernel is very unbloated. The rest is just drivers. The recent increases in size are due to cleaner driver models and better VM/Scheduler which are a benefit to everybody (especially big iron with lots of users). Then there are drivers and ports on top - but they aren't bloat since they don't have to be compiled, or they can be compiled as separate projects into modules. IMHO, with initramfs, the kernel should soon start to make more and more stuff modularised and more code will then be shared - this will be very very good.
That's easy, you can do it for us. Just specify a general and fast binary interface for drivers, and implement and compile it as a module for each kernel as it is released. Then third parties just write to your interface and users load your interface and the third party modules. See? So come on then. Get working on it for the rest of us.
That is, after all, what has to be done to acheive the effect you're asking for. It just needs somebody to commit their time to it. That person is you.
If the file or file segment is bigger than the hash, then yes. A one byte hash can represent 256 different values. A two byte file can represent 256 times as many values. On average then, there are 256 two byte files for each hash value.
No-no, Biology is a specific form of colouring in.
The issue with that is the heat and die area for clock distribution over what would be simply a much larger HT CPU. The dual core approach avoids massive increases in heat dissipation and die area and essentially introduces synchronisation at the memory interface. This is the first step on the way to clockless CPUs, which is when you will see what you just wished for.
Technically, they also degrade more gracefully (as they go out one by one, and the signal keeps shining). Unfortunately, the circuitry to make them appear to be a halogen lamp from the perspective of the controller's LMU (Lamp Monitoring Unit) has a tendency to blow its fuse, causing the effect of a single lamp out very frequently. Perhaps when the controllers are designed for LED signals from the ground up they will *actually* be cost-effective. Currently the labour to frequently attend site to replace those fuses is costly.
Moore's law has stuck around for forty years in the same way that my pet hampster lived for ten years. It died but got replaced by something similar with the same name and nobody noticed.
There is something I missed off... It should be scaleable wrt history size, so you don't have to have separate histories for each year (which is the recommended practise with arch). It should also not impose such a silly naming policy.