Thanks for that; I was trying to find the original source and only managed to go back to Picasso. I wonder where T.S. Eliot stole it from:-) This does capture the spirit that I think Steve Jobs meant the phrase in. I wonder if he knew the Eliot version? However, it doesn't take away from the fact that Jobs was largely packaging together ideas others had come up with and contributing style and execution. He had no right, having copied so much, to demand that other people never copy him.
That is the least of it. This article about multi-touch from Bill Buxton at Microsoft Research shows lots more. Things to note; Capacitive interfaces in 1985; touch based smart phone in 1992; Starfire the movie from 1992 (note hand drawn picture showing grid interface)
"Good Artists Borrow, Great Artists Steal" - Steve Jobs, 1996 - apparently stolen from Picasso
BTW; apparently there was a commercial deal between Xerox and Apple related to the WIMP interface; that becomes a contract issue rather than a theft issue.
I hate to point it out, but Slashdot, not being based in the UK, will have to do squat. As always, the US will completely ignore this (and rightly so) whilst at the same time forcing the UK to follow it's stupid patent rules. Slashdot will always be able to call on the 1st amendment to the US constitution. All this does is make another way for rich people in the UK to control the freedom expression of poor people in the UK.
No; comparing proprietary software to slavery and the GPL to laws against slavery. The BSD license is compared to a lack of laws against slavery.
This has got to be the stupidest pro-GPL argument I've ever seen.
That's apparently becuase you can't read; you're entertaining anyway, so let's go on.
[...]
First, I know you folks always like anthropomorphizing code, but please stop that
Now you are tilting at straw men.. Cool. But anyway, no I wasn't. I quite specifically wrote for example
The BSD society as a whole, which includes a whole bunch of Junos and OS X users
And several other things which made it very clear that I was talking about the freedom of people, not the freedom of code. Sometimes people take shortcuts and talk about the software being free, but even when they do that, and I don't, it doesn't take much intelligence to be able to translate the freedom of code they talk about into freedom of people. I didn't want to assume that all the readers would have such a level of intelligence. However, I see I still failed to aim low enough to reach everybody. I apologise and will try harder next time.
In most of the rest of the post you repeatedly stick your lance through the straw man, expecting him to scream out in pain; I think we will leave out humiliating you over that.
So, do you think you could now make your argument a bit stupider for all of us by turning it into a Nazi or holocaust reference?
Your writing is funny and angry enough that I really think you should get an account. How can I be sure you will even read this??
Imagine that a whole load of really stupid people started running around, building political parties and beginning to get involved in society. Now imagine that they did this whilst being able to completely tune out everybody's argument except their own. Imagine that they saw only the things that they wanted to see in the writings of others. Eventually, if this went on and kept increasing, they might start developing prejudices against others. They might start throwing stones through their windows; they might start attacking them in the street; eventually the situation could get more and more serious. Imagine if we completely gave up on challenging lazy stupidity.
So tell me, is there a cadre of you "you're shilling" cocksuckers out there, or is it more of a dynamic movement where various douchebags independently decide they want to go out and call everyone a shill/astroturfer?
And if there's a cadre of you out there, who is the head douchebag and how do you elect him? Is he the guy with the bear that grows furthest down his neck, or the fattest one with the most ironic black tee-shirt and the most baselessly smug grimace?
Ooooh don't we get irate. I was just trying to be polite. I didn't want to suggest that he might write the post spontaneously. You are right by the way, our chief is the head bear wrestler.
Just like a white American male from the South in the early 19th century, the individual developer with a piece of BSD licensed software is more free than the current white American male. He can even choose to release his code as free / have no slaves. However, just as in the south, most people with BSD software are not developers and so they lose certainty of their future freedom for nothing. The BSD society as a whole, which includes a whole bunch of Junos and OS X users, for example, is less free than the GPL society. This even feeds back to the slaver who is unable to live in a society without slavery and is much the worse for it. BSD developers are slightly luckier because there are enclaves, like OpenBSD where real freedom exists but these are always small exceptions.
It may not be 'the best' but it's pretty respectable.
Look; I know you're shilling and all that, and I have a family to feed too, so I don't want to criticise, but could you please sound a bit less pathetic:
<beos_fan> BeOS is really not that bad; it's almost better than Windows and it really does interact well. BeOS may not be as effective as a Mac and it doesn't have the user friendliness of Twm but it's really good. Hell, I tried an AT&T Hobbit but I didn't like it one bit, but now that they've moved to the new PowerPC (TM) hardware I'm just amazed by how it does some of what the other systems do. It could be a real winner in my honest opinion. </beos_fan>
Just imagine that? No unpaid BeOS fan would ever descend to your level, so if you are going to carry out your profession for Microsoft, at least make it sound like you're trying to make it sound like you're enthusiastic.
You probably mean different things by UNIX. UNIX is both a historical operating system and a standard. His words are imprecise in a very dangerous way (some of the actors in destroying SCO probably had this misunderstanding) but it isn't 100% wrong.
I tried looking and I can't find absolute numbers. Very old numbers suggest 40k iOS and 10k Androiddevelopers (probably equal by now?? there is much less need to register to try Android development). What's clear is that there are about 100k iOS apps and about 2k blackberry apps. If we have a 13:1 ratio (note the massive error bars) on the proportion of people making money, that suggests that about five times the number of develpers are making money on iOS as are making money on Blackberry.
Key measures are a) profit share and b) share of web browsing c) number of app downloads and total number of (quality?) apps availble; in other words, what matters is how much the user use and can use their phones. Android will overtake Apple in these measures but it is taking much longer. If you think like this Apple is still ahead so far (and only just, and only if you include the iPod touch!).
Incidentally, this shows that WP7 has almost no hope. If you are an app developer you will do an iPhone app and some will do an Android app to show you support "alternative" people. Soon it will be the other way round (in fact I'd say that it's already the other way round in some markets). The inertia you need to overcome the leader is too much. The only reason that Android is succeeding is that Apple left a low end in the market available for them to develop in. Now the market has to be analysed as the 1990's PC market. Apple is Apple. Android is Windows and Windows is OS2, a late entry by an an over-arrogant computing incumbent.
Nokia isn't a newbie. They have a history of making the best mobile devices on the planet, hardware wise. They suck with software. Microsoft's Windows Phone 7 is actually great OS to new phones. Combined with Nokia's experience with hardware and their history in mobile technology, I think they will actually go far.
I really don't know where this story has come from. Nokia's hardware has almost always been second rate. Never bad, but never nearly the best (original 2110, 6310i as possible exceptions, but even then there were always models which were arguably better). What Nokia phone's had was good usability (that means software). They were the first ones that you could send a decent SMS with. Ones where sending an MMS became really easy. The menu was always intuitive compared to the other mobile phones. What Nokia as a company has had is good logistics, image and marketing.
more educated people lead to lowered paying educated jobs
This is likely true on a local scale for a particular area. The relationship may not be so clear overall since more educated people can, if used correctly, generate more opportunities for doing things a) by buying more and b) using the output of other educated people. Think, for a slightly different example, that the value of theatre graduates increases as there are more people who are able to appreciate the difference between a good and a bad play. The same goes for mathematicians. If there are engineers who know what to do with the mathematics then mathematics may actually be a profitable activity.
The summary for this Slashdot article was so ignorant and biased that I actually registered just to comment on it.
cute.
"After the police broke in to a Gizmodo editor's home [...]"
They didn't "break in" -- they had a search warrant.
The search warrant was illegal. It had been procured under false pretenses and so it was no search warrant. The act was a "break in" even if the individual officers may not be able to be found culpable for it
"[...] the San Mateo District Attorney's office petitioned the court to withdraw the search warrant [...]"
The San Mateo District Attorney's Office didn't petition the court to withdraw the search warrant. The San Mateo District Attorney's Office petitioned the court to issue the search warrant.
Just because one thing is true does not mean that another is not true. In this case the DA suddenly realised that he had broken the law (or less charitably, realised he had been caught breaking the law) and, correctly, attempted to minimise the damage this would do by also petitioning to withdraw the search warrant. This is clearly visible in the page on the EFF website which covers this request
"[...] because it violated a law intended to protect journalists [...]"
The search warrant didn't violate any laws. Journalistic shield laws exist to protect the sources of journalists. The identities of Gizmodo's "sources" (or "sellers") were already known to police. They were in custody and cooperating with police. Journalistic shield laws do not exist so that journalists can purchase stolen goods.
The DA's petition to withdraw the warrant, which it appears you were ignorant of, is a pretty clear admission that some law had a pretty good chance of shielding Gizmodo. Various posturing in the press about what they have or hadn't done is not something which can be compared to a court document.
It isn't a crime to execute a search warrant. It is a crime to purchase a stolen iPhone prototype, damage, and dissect it in order to publish trade secrets before the product has hit shelves, or even been announced to the public. It is damaging not only to Apple, but to their employees and shareholders.
"[...] Nevertheless, the DA, rather than apologize [...]"
Why should the DA apologize for doing his job? The DA deserves an apology from whoever authored this article stub.
And now whoever authored the stub deserves an apology from you... But don't feel too bad about it, around here we rarely bother apologising for merely being wrong. Your post is certainly on the point and above average here though to really get modded up you need to do better. Welcome to Slashdot. BTW; you will find that <quote> is better than <i> and more standard Slashdot style.
In the order withdrawing the search warrant the judge stipulated that the documents should be kept under seal. That is a completely acceptable limitation on free speech which is not an absolute 100% right when it conflicts with other rights (in this case the right to be "secure in their persons, houses, papers"). It seems to me that in breaking that stipulation the DA should be charged with contempt of court.
Whoa, Nellie. Small difference between looking and fantasizing, huge difference between fantasizing and doing.
Er yes; Except that if you read the article you would find that the entire incident started with complaints about actual actions with actual children the priest was involved with. Finding child pornography on the laptop of a man accused of doing things to children is the "oh shit there's no chance this has been a misunderstanding by some parents" moment at which you call in the police and suspend the priest immediately.
But don't let me put inconvenient "facts" in the way of some irrelevant rant.
I am not even sure why this is on slashdot. Except to fuel the Hate towards Catholics.
There is a quite specific problem here. The Bishop involved was actually attempting to destroy evidence by giving a laptop containing the photos back to the family of the priest. Destruction of this kind of evidence is is an interesting and important IT story whatever the organisation.
It is deeply, very disturbing that people like you are coming here and, instead of saying "something is wrong in the Catholic church, this stuff happens too often" you are picking on random uninvolved groups such as atheists and protestants (I guess muslims were too obvious??) as a way of deflecting this responsibility.
Far more disturbing is the idea that you think that having confessed is sufficient and they should then just be allowed to "go on" with child abuse. If there was a requirement to make restitution and to report for psychological testing and treatment then this might be merely acceptable insanity. However, it's clear from the article that the priest did not just store photos, but also acted in an inappropriate way. This means that there needs to be investigation and failure to do so shows a complete disregard for the safety of the local children.
If you want to look at who's causing problems for the Catholic church; go find a mirror. There are plenty of other people in the church who would be very happy if people like you could just recognise your failure and help them to clean up the situation a bit.
a) Lots of soldiers have civilian gear as well. E.g. iPhones. You don't want them to have the opportunity to cheat. You do want them to use the gear in the way that they might without GPS so they have the feel for how it would be.
b) Lots of systems are doing automated switch over; it may not be possible to properly activate that mode in the presence of GPS. E.g. if you have a system which does GPS navigation normally and then switches over to inertial navigation, you want to act as if there was a real GPS jamming.
To be frank, anybody, military or otherwise who's operating GPS gear without a working fallback is irresponsible. What they should do is introduce safety regulations which say so and then give a very large fine to fishermen who complain next time. That will reduce the discussion.
Look, I haven't even read anything about the case that I remember, but I can already tell by the fact that you are talking about seven of nine of thirty four that you are repeating lies.
In a criminal case there are always lots of witnesses. People who have nothing to do with seeing the actual event, but, for example, testify that the victim owned a red dress. That there are tonnes of witnesses who didn't recant talks nothing about the witnesses that actually were key and that did recant.
Now I read up about it. The main evidence was ignored because they failed to call the guy you talked about (Coles). How's this quote from the article.
One of Davis's lawyers stated that the day before they had been unsuccessful in serving a subpoena on Coles; Moore responded that the attempt had been made too late
What the Fuck? You discipline a lawyer for failing to call a witness. Fine him all you like. Failing to hear the witness and excluding potentially exhonorating evidence because of a lawyer's fuck up is a strict breach of the principle of "beyond reasonable doubt". You guys need to declare yourself a protectorate of a country with a legal system and pay them to administrate you for a few hundred years.
If you don't like it, tell all the vendors inside the mall why the infringement on your personal liberties is keeping you from patronizing their businesses.
It looks like people have. Never let anyone say we are powerless. Now the question is, how can we arrange a boycott of the police force???
Attourney's cool useful and all that. However, you probably want to have a vision of what you want to achieve. The right attourney will then be able to help you do it.
Schools should be about developing and spreading open knowledge. Things like the CC-BY-SA and AGPLv3 licenses are probably very suitable for this. However, in some areas you will find that you want to collaborate with others. You will want flexibility to change from the default when required.
On the other hand, look at the story of NCSA Mosaic, where NCSA invented the web browser but then was forced out of the market by closed systems such as Netscape and Microsoft Internet Explorer. Insisting on a strong copyleft license is quite important to ensuring that future derivatives of the work continue to be fully accessible to your school.
Probably what you would want to do is allow CC-SA-BY for texts and AGPLv3 for software by default and allow other licenses as agreed exceptions.
Your lawyer can now tell you how to make an agreement between the School and it's employees which will support that aim.
Slashdot Mirror
Welcome to the human race.
Use of a grid on a touch device. Yes it sounds stupid to me; which likely has nothing to do with whether it would hold up in court.
Thanks for that; I was trying to find the original source and only managed to go back to Picasso. I wonder where T.S. Eliot stole it from :-) This does capture the spirit that I think Steve Jobs meant the phrase in. I wonder if he knew the Eliot version? However, it doesn't take away from the fact that Jobs was largely packaging together ideas others had come up with and contributing style and execution. He had no right, having copied so much, to demand that other people never copy him.
That is the least of it. This article about multi-touch from Bill Buxton at Microsoft Research shows lots more. Things to note; Capacitive interfaces in 1985; touch based smart phone in 1992; Starfire the movie from 1992 (note hand drawn picture showing grid interface)
"Good Artists Borrow, Great Artists Steal" - Steve Jobs, 1996 - apparently stolen from Picasso
BTW; apparently there was a commercial deal between Xerox and Apple related to the WIMP interface; that becomes a contract issue rather than a theft issue.
I hate to point it out, but Slashdot, not being based in the UK, will have to do squat. As always, the US will completely ignore this (and rightly so) whilst at the same time forcing the UK to follow it's stupid patent rules. Slashdot will always be able to call on the 1st amendment to the US constitution. All this does is make another way for rich people in the UK to control the freedom expression of poor people in the UK.
LOL. Comparing BSD license to slavery?
No; comparing proprietary software to slavery and the GPL to laws against slavery. The BSD license is compared to a lack of laws against slavery.
This has got to be the stupidest pro-GPL argument I've ever seen.
That's apparently becuase you can't read; you're entertaining anyway, so let's go on.
[...]
First, I know you folks always like anthropomorphizing code, but please stop that
Now you are tilting at straw men.. Cool. But anyway, no I wasn't. I quite specifically wrote for example
The BSD society as a whole, which includes a whole bunch of Junos and OS X users
And several other things which made it very clear that I was talking about the freedom of people, not the freedom of code. Sometimes people take shortcuts and talk about the software being free, but even when they do that, and I don't, it doesn't take much intelligence to be able to translate the freedom of code they talk about into freedom of people. I didn't want to assume that all the readers would have such a level of intelligence. However, I see I still failed to aim low enough to reach everybody. I apologise and will try harder next time.
In most of the rest of the post you repeatedly stick your lance through the straw man, expecting him to scream out in pain; I think we will leave out humiliating you over that.
So, do you think you could now make your argument a bit stupider for all of us by turning it into a Nazi or holocaust reference?
Your writing is funny and angry enough that I really think you should get an account. How can I be sure you will even read this??
Imagine that a whole load of really stupid people started running around, building political parties and beginning to get involved in society. Now imagine that they did this whilst being able to completely tune out everybody's argument except their own. Imagine that they saw only the things that they wanted to see in the writings of others. Eventually, if this went on and kept increasing, they might start developing prejudices against others. They might start throwing stones through their windows; they might start attacking them in the street; eventually the situation could get more and more serious. Imagine if we completely gave up on challenging lazy stupidity.
So tell me, is there a cadre of you "you're shilling" cocksuckers out there, or is it more of a dynamic movement where various douchebags independently decide they want to go out and call everyone a shill/astroturfer?
And if there's a cadre of you out there, who is the head douchebag and how do you elect him? Is he the guy with the bear that grows furthest down his neck, or the fattest one with the most ironic black tee-shirt and the most baselessly smug grimace?
Ooooh don't we get irate. I was just trying to be polite. I didn't want to suggest that he might write the post spontaneously. You are right by the way, our chief is the head bear wrestler.
Just like a white American male from the South in the early 19th century, the individual developer with a piece of BSD licensed software is more free than the current white American male. He can even choose to release his code as free / have no slaves. However, just as in the south, most people with BSD software are not developers and so they lose certainty of their future freedom for nothing. The BSD society as a whole, which includes a whole bunch of Junos and OS X users, for example, is less free than the GPL society. This even feeds back to the slaver who is unable to live in a society without slavery and is much the worse for it. BSD developers are slightly luckier because there are enclaves, like OpenBSD where real freedom exists but these are always small exceptions.
It may not be 'the best' but it's pretty respectable.
Look; I know you're shilling and all that, and I have a family to feed too, so I don't want to criticise, but could you please sound a bit less pathetic:
<beos_fan> BeOS is really not that bad; it's almost better than Windows and it really does interact well. BeOS may not be as effective as a Mac and it doesn't have the user friendliness of Twm but it's really good. Hell, I tried an AT&T Hobbit but I didn't like it one bit, but now that they've moved to the new PowerPC (TM) hardware I'm just amazed by how it does some of what the other systems do. It could be a real winner in my honest opinion. </beos_fan>
Just imagine that? No unpaid BeOS fan would ever descend to your level, so if you are going to carry out your profession for Microsoft, at least make it sound like you're trying to make it sound like you're enthusiastic.
You probably mean different things by UNIX. UNIX is both a historical operating system and a standard. His words are imprecise in a very dangerous way (some of the actors in destroying SCO probably had this misunderstanding) but it isn't 100% wrong.
I tried looking and I can't find absolute numbers. Very old numbers suggest 40k iOS and 10k Androiddevelopers (probably equal by now?? there is much less need to register to try Android development). What's clear is that there are about 100k iOS apps and about 2k blackberry apps. If we have a 13:1 ratio (note the massive error bars) on the proportion of people making money, that suggests that about five times the number of develpers are making money on iOS as are making money on Blackberry.
In other words, Blackberry is doomed :-b
Key measures are a) profit share and b) share of web browsing c) number of app downloads and total number of (quality?) apps availble; in other words, what matters is how much the user use and can use their phones. Android will overtake Apple in these measures but it is taking much longer. If you think like this Apple is still ahead so far (and only just, and only if you include the iPod touch!).
Incidentally, this shows that WP7 has almost no hope. If you are an app developer you will do an iPhone app and some will do an Android app to show you support "alternative" people. Soon it will be the other way round (in fact I'd say that it's already the other way round in some markets). The inertia you need to overcome the leader is too much. The only reason that Android is succeeding is that Apple left a low end in the market available for them to develop in. Now the market has to be analysed as the 1990's PC market. Apple is Apple. Android is Windows and Windows is OS2, a late entry by an an over-arrogant computing incumbent.
What authority do they have to issue warnings?
They were citizens of The United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland. As such, they are allowed to issue all sorts of warnings. For example:
If you don't stop posting silly comments to Slashdot you may be in trouble.
So watch out sunshine.
Nokia isn't a newbie. They have a history of making the best mobile devices on the planet, hardware wise. They suck with software. Microsoft's Windows Phone 7 is actually great OS to new phones. Combined with Nokia's experience with hardware and their history in mobile technology, I think they will actually go far.
I really don't know where this story has come from. Nokia's hardware has almost always been second rate. Never bad, but never nearly the best (original 2110, 6310i as possible exceptions, but even then there were always models which were arguably better). What Nokia phone's had was good usability (that means software). They were the first ones that you could send a decent SMS with. Ones where sending an MMS became really easy. The menu was always intuitive compared to the other mobile phones. What Nokia as a company has had is good logistics, image and marketing.
more educated people lead to lowered paying educated jobs
This is likely true on a local scale for a particular area. The relationship may not be so clear overall since more educated people can, if used correctly, generate more opportunities for doing things a) by buying more and b) using the output of other educated people. Think, for a slightly different example, that the value of theatre graduates increases as there are more people who are able to appreciate the difference between a good and a bad play. The same goes for mathematicians. If there are engineers who know what to do with the mathematics then mathematics may actually be a profitable activity.
The summary for this Slashdot article was so ignorant and biased that I actually registered just to comment on it.
cute.
"After the police broke in to a Gizmodo editor's home [...]" They didn't "break in" -- they had a search warrant.
The search warrant was illegal. It had been procured under false pretenses and so it was no search warrant. The act was a "break in" even if the individual officers may not be able to be found culpable for it
"[...] the San Mateo District Attorney's office petitioned the court to withdraw the search warrant [...]" The San Mateo District Attorney's Office didn't petition the court to withdraw the search warrant. The San Mateo District Attorney's Office petitioned the court to issue the search warrant.
Just because one thing is true does not mean that another is not true. In this case the DA suddenly realised that he had broken the law (or less charitably, realised he had been caught breaking the law) and, correctly, attempted to minimise the damage this would do by also petitioning to withdraw the search warrant. This is clearly visible in the page on the EFF website which covers this request
"[...] because it violated a law intended to protect journalists [...]" The search warrant didn't violate any laws. Journalistic shield laws exist to protect the sources of journalists. The identities of Gizmodo's "sources" (or "sellers") were already known to police. They were in custody and cooperating with police. Journalistic shield laws do not exist so that journalists can purchase stolen goods.
The DA's petition to withdraw the warrant, which it appears you were ignorant of, is a pretty clear admission that some law had a pretty good chance of shielding Gizmodo. Various posturing in the press about what they have or hadn't done is not something which can be compared to a court document.
It isn't a crime to execute a search warrant. It is a crime to purchase a stolen iPhone prototype, damage, and dissect it in order to publish trade secrets before the product has hit shelves, or even been announced to the public. It is damaging not only to Apple, but to their employees and shareholders. "[...] Nevertheless, the DA, rather than apologize [...]" Why should the DA apologize for doing his job? The DA deserves an apology from whoever authored this article stub.
And now whoever authored the stub deserves an apology from you... But don't feel too bad about it, around here we rarely bother apologising for merely being wrong. Your post is certainly on the point and above average here though to really get modded up you need to do better. Welcome to Slashdot. BTW; you will find that <quote> is better than <i> and more standard Slashdot style.
In the order withdrawing the search warrant the judge stipulated that the documents should be kept under seal. That is a completely acceptable limitation on free speech which is not an absolute 100% right when it conflicts with other rights (in this case the right to be "secure in their persons, houses, papers"). It seems to me that in breaking that stipulation the DA should be charged with contempt of court.
Whoa, Nellie. Small difference between looking and fantasizing, huge difference between fantasizing and doing.
Er yes; Except that if you read the article you would find that the entire incident started with complaints about actual actions with actual children the priest was involved with. Finding child pornography on the laptop of a man accused of doing things to children is the "oh shit there's no chance this has been a misunderstanding by some parents" moment at which you call in the police and suspend the priest immediately.
But don't let me put inconvenient "facts" in the way of some irrelevant rant.
I am not even sure why this is on slashdot. Except to fuel the Hate towards Catholics.
There is a quite specific problem here. The Bishop involved was actually attempting to destroy evidence by giving a laptop containing the photos back to the family of the priest. Destruction of this kind of evidence is is an interesting and important IT story whatever the organisation.
It is deeply, very disturbing that people like you are coming here and, instead of saying "something is wrong in the Catholic church, this stuff happens too often" you are picking on random uninvolved groups such as atheists and protestants (I guess muslims were too obvious??) as a way of deflecting this responsibility.
Far more disturbing is the idea that you think that having confessed is sufficient and they should then just be allowed to "go on" with child abuse. If there was a requirement to make restitution and to report for psychological testing and treatment then this might be merely acceptable insanity. However, it's clear from the article that the priest did not just store photos, but also acted in an inappropriate way. This means that there needs to be investigation and failure to do so shows a complete disregard for the safety of the local children.
If you want to look at who's causing problems for the Catholic church; go find a mirror. There are plenty of other people in the church who would be very happy if people like you could just recognise your failure and help them to clean up the situation a bit.
I get 450 miles from near Kirkmaden to Outstack. It's maybe not much bigger than 200 miles, but it's certainly at least slightly bigger.
.. to the resurgence of pettiness as the primary means of political discourse ....
+7 incisive
a) Lots of soldiers have civilian gear as well. E.g. iPhones. You don't want them to have the opportunity to cheat. You do want them to use the gear in the way that they might without GPS so they have the feel for how it would be.
b) Lots of systems are doing automated switch over; it may not be possible to properly activate that mode in the presence of GPS. E.g. if you have a system which does GPS navigation normally and then switches over to inertial navigation, you want to act as if there was a real GPS jamming.
To be frank, anybody, military or otherwise who's operating GPS gear without a working fallback is irresponsible. What they should do is introduce safety regulations which say so and then give a very large fine to fishermen who complain next time. That will reduce the discussion.
Look, I haven't even read anything about the case that I remember, but I can already tell by the fact that you are talking about seven of nine of thirty four that you are repeating lies. In a criminal case there are always lots of witnesses. People who have nothing to do with seeing the actual event, but, for example, testify that the victim owned a red dress. That there are tonnes of witnesses who didn't recant talks nothing about the witnesses that actually were key and that did recant.
Now I read up about it. The main evidence was ignored because they failed to call the guy you talked about (Coles). How's this quote from the article.
One of Davis's lawyers stated that the day before they had been unsuccessful in serving a subpoena on Coles; Moore responded that the attempt had been made too late
What the Fuck? You discipline a lawyer for failing to call a witness. Fine him all you like. Failing to hear the witness and excluding potentially exhonorating evidence because of a lawyer's fuck up is a strict breach of the principle of "beyond reasonable doubt". You guys need to declare yourself a protectorate of a country with a legal system and pay them to administrate you for a few hundred years.
If you don't like it, tell all the vendors inside the mall why the infringement on your personal liberties is keeping you from patronizing their businesses.
It looks like people have. Never let anyone say we are powerless. Now the question is, how can we arrange a boycott of the police force???
Attourney's cool useful and all that. However, you probably want to have a vision of what you want to achieve. The right attourney will then be able to help you do it.
Schools should be about developing and spreading open knowledge. Things like the CC-BY-SA and AGPLv3 licenses are probably very suitable for this. However, in some areas you will find that you want to collaborate with others. You will want flexibility to change from the default when required.
On the other hand, look at the story of NCSA Mosaic, where NCSA invented the web browser but then was forced out of the market by closed systems such as Netscape and Microsoft Internet Explorer. Insisting on a strong copyleft license is quite important to ensuring that future derivatives of the work continue to be fully accessible to your school.
Probably what you would want to do is allow CC-SA-BY for texts and AGPLv3 for software by default and allow other licenses as agreed exceptions.
Your lawyer can now tell you how to make an agreement between the School and it's employees which will support that aim.