djees, don't be that narrow sighted, I don't even have to guess what part of the world you're from.
There are countries where kids can drive a small motor cycle from 16 yrs onwards as long as it doesn't go faster than 25/40 (don't know exactly). If it goes faster, you need a drivers license and have to wear a helmet.
I don't think that the limiter is electronic since this is around for a few decades already, I assume it's controlling the injection (mix?).
'Pumping up' the bikes is a common practice here and the police have regular checks around schools to test the speed.
I do agree that when you're stopped by the police, then most often don't need a check to know if you drank alcohol,:)
Nah, most ppl that actually do drink and drive (have a habit) will have some switch installed hidden for the police. Teenagers with motorcycles and truck drivers have all kinds of technical restrictions built in/imposed and it's common knowledge that a large part of them has such a contraption.
The police normally don't bother to take the vehicle apart to find the hidden switch...
I would have to agree that more testing and more testing is the only successful way (like they do over here around new year (december/january: drinking under influence drops significantly, only to rise again in february:-/).
How did this get modded as insightful? This reasoning is exactly what the M$ programs are about. Being an (ex)tutor myself, these formats are not good and are too (ego)centric.
Why would one need to save to a platform specific format and not to a platform independent format? M$ users can just as well save to pdf, rtf or whatever with their programs. Those documents could then be read with the platform of choice and in most cases with the viewer of choice. I for one was not interested in rebooting my development machine to check the submissions (project reports etc) or going to a lab to find a free M$ machine.
Students I was guiding knew this and submitted their files in a platform independent format (at the end OOo). It also made them think why and to what purpose they actually use e.g. M$ Word: In most cases, it's an elephant that is used to squat a mosquito: you don't need such a monster program to type in a small report/question of a couple of pages or an abstract of the project.
As for the story, I can just conclude that the teacher was underqualified: why would you want a ppt file for watching somebody elses presentation???
Especially with the advent of OOo, I can see no reason whatsoever why ppl (even the less tech savvy) should use M$ formats...
It is not because some project is being abandonned, that the code that was produced in the project is dead.
Often much of the code or ideas are taken over and incorporated into other or new projects. To my experience, it often pays off to start anew. And if in the process another branch is created, so what; I am programming in the first case because I need something which is not available and because I find it fun to do.
Sometimes, developers; even though they don't have time to actively persue development; consider their projects as their children, and do not like giving it out of their hands. Reusing code into a new project is therefore often a good choice.
This is IMHO one of the good points of OS/FS, you don't have to bother with the ground work each time you decide to do something, you can just go out, find some functionality you need and write your added value.
As far as I have read the SF policy, archiving OS/FS is as important as hosting the active projects. Once you add your code in SF, you cannot remove it again.
I am an active Linux user and developer, so what. I just think it is a pitty that some ppl, especially from the free/unix side still have to proclaim in such a way that their flavour is better and given an informative discription.
Just when I have the impression that a lot of the distro wars are over (or am I just passively ignoring them), some BSD zealot has to attack Linux. I have the impression that the author of the site/tool used these words sarcastically, but the submitter of the story should have had better judgement than to just take over the heading of the page.
I want to try BSD from the moment I have some more time (possibly in some emulator or on an old box initially) and I don't care that much what *n*x system I am working on, especially when I consider the alternative. This kind of stuff does not really help when the *n*x playground if fighting like small children while big brother is sitting by and enjoying the spectacle.
Hm, I'm taking myself too seriously again:-/ Let's kiss and make up:) [hm, come to think of it, since I guess the author is a 'guy', I'll drop the kissing]
Nice tool, though I don't see the real innovative in this simular things are available (dunno for which *n*x but I would guess they are pretty platform independent).
Well, for this time, I have to agree with some of the 'Flamebait' moderated posts, this is a very lame question...
So, you are basically asking why you are no longer able to buy obsolete hardware (3 button mouse)? Especially considering the fact, that for the same price, you get a mouse which offers the exact same functionality (3 buttons) even more, it offers a scroll wheel (i.e. 5 buttons).
Basically you are wondering why you get more for the same price, because this is what it is: even though you are offered 5 buttons, noone is forceing you to use them. Configure your system to use only 3 (press the wheel as you point out).
I would assume that most people opt for these systems and since the 3 button mouse only has a subset of the functionality of this wheel mouse, it is not worth the effort to produce them.
Makes sense to me,...
Well, this is about the most stupid comment I made. Let's have some more coffee...
This somewhat seems to me as job-creation from the military. Let's scare ppl so we'll get tons of money to spend in the next years...
This being said, I wonder if there should not be something as acceptable privacy. From what is said in the article, the general fears that countries might attack the US satelites in orbit.
Oh heck. could you blame them? Consider a country like, yes, China or even some other (Arab (?), they have money enough and are pissed) country knowing that at any time some satelites are orbitting and inspecting their military bases. Satelites that were designed and launched for this sole purpose mind you...
I have no clue if China has these things above the USA (or Europe and let's not forget Russia), but for all I am concerned, countries should have the right to get those things out of the sky when they get a shot at it. Seems only fair to me, those things should never have been there in the first place: for some reason, a spy airplane is bad and a satelite is fine,...
If this is the case, and 'war' starts in space: who would be to blame? The guys putting those 'prying eyes' in the sky or the ones protecting their privacy/country and taking them down.
I have a pretty good idea what the general's view would be...
How is the ISS slowing the US down. Fact of the matter is that the US is not willing to pour lots of money into an expensive program which does not yield any direct revenue (which is basically the same reasoning the EU and Russia is following).
I would rather think that the ISS is one of the first programs that _really_ helps space exploration forward: not only does it provide a good permanent base in space for continuous research, but more importantly, it finally unites a large part of the space travelling world in one program (out of pure financial need). I don't know about you, but I would call this one of the major achievements of the ISS.
And yes, I've been to the Cape Canaveral and I was ashamed of the language some of the engineers (people that you would expect to have a decent education, but perhaps they were deliberately screened out to give tours) were using: basically cold war talk and pure propaganda (we do not have the lead in commercial launchings but we have a firm resolve to get this in the first years).
I hope that ISS helps showing that together we can achieve more out there than alone (yes, I've been raised with a weekly Star Trek dose).
I've seen a lot of comments which are mainly outdated and ill informed.
First off, indeed, some European countries did not have a Anglo-Saxon Ms/Bs system in the past. I believe some countries adherred to a more German system, where you had the 'candidatures' (after 2 years) and the 'licenses' (after 2 or 3 years; 2 for 'normal' studies, e.g. history, archeology,... and 3 for engineering and some medicin studies). The candidatures are not really accepted as a final degree, but a way to the licenses (hardly anybody stopped studying after a candidature). These are the broad lines.
One of the formost problems with this was the diversity of the degrees. You typically had 'universities' and 'high schools (=/= american high-schools). For some long term degrees (4/5 years) the degree of a high-school did not get accepted abroad (including some engineering degrees), while the university degrees were universally (pun) accepted.
Then there were the differences between countries... Over the last decade, countries started to simplify and reform their studies. If I remember correctly, Sweden had at some point over 100 different engineering degrees.
More recently (and which has been the cause for quite some protest), all the EU countries signed an agreement to take up the Master/Bachelor system (Bologna Accords). As far as I know, this system is currently being introduced (if you start now, you should be in this system) and is retro-active (if you graduated in the old system, you can call yourself Master).
Of course, there are still discussions going on (and I basically lost the thread by now) between lobbying groups (which are sometimes powerful and recruite off campus) that e.g. think that an engineer of a university should be an MSc while one from a high-school should be a 'simple' Master (and so on and so forth). [some weven wanted to have high-schools only deliver bachelor degrees while leaving masters to the universities]. I will not go into the ramafications of these discussions, it's enough to say that if some ppl had their way, it would be more chaos again.
I just hope the politicians get their act together and for once, take some rational decisions, once and for all making the higher education homogeneous. After all, if there would be an objective difference between degree X from school A and degree Y from university B, I assume recuiters would take up on this (as they already do now for some degrees that are offered on both universities and high-schools).
But in the discussion about degrees, all rationality seems to be gone out the window at some times... Some people seem to like protecting the education and degree with all kinds of laws, thus decoupling 'capabilities' from 'person' but linking 'capabilities' with 'degree/institution'.
As for your question, if you come to the EU for studies, pick a university with a good reputation. You can hardly miss. Another note that I want to add (from my limited experience with US degrees) is that the EU educations (also depending from institution to institution) put more weight on theory (mathematics).
Well, it's rather a complex explanation,but you might start with this this link, watch the episode and then contemplate again over the relevance of this signature in an IT dominated envorinment...
Google would have helped you on the way though,...
I've been an avid fan of this comic book for over a decade or so (at the rate of one release a year, there are currently 14/15 comic books, it depends if you count the overview).
For the ppl that want (some) more background: the comic book is written (scenarie) by Jean Van Hamme, who has also worked on Thorgal and Largo Winch (btw, the series does not do the comic book justice), just to name the most well know ones (I am personally a fan of the chninkel. Van Hamme (a professor in Brussels IIRC) is one of the best scenario writers (with the ever dark Dufaux).
The drawings of XIII are done by Vance, who also worked on Bruce J Hawker (and some other high profiled titles, the names escape me at this moment).
Currently, the story arc of the comic book has stopped (a bit), mainly because the identify of number I (yes XIII stands for a number) has been shown. However, the new comic book seems to identify that all is not what it seems and new conspiracies await (showing high ranking CIA/FBI and military personal having succeeded in the coup d'etat in the US).
The first cycle (if I can call it that) was mainly driven by the search for the identity of the main character, finding himself in situations where his life is changed in a blink of an eye and where nothing is what it is and can be trusted.
Furthermore, the issue of the identity of XIII is still not entirely clear, nor is the role of some of the seemingly allies.
1 Freedom to use. A GPL licensed program can be used for any purpose whatsoever. 2 Freedom to copy and distribute. You are allowed to make exact copies and distribute these, in both source and binary code, as long as you grant the same right to the person you distribute it too. 3 Freedom to modify. You are allowed to modify the code in whatever way you want. 4 Freedom to copy and distribute modifications. Again, the distribution has to be in source and binary code, and it has to grant the same right to the person it is distributed to.
What you are proposing is breaking the 1st freedom; it is not because they claim the GPL is invalid that we believe so and should break it. A more valid request is IMHO the one GCC did, is to refuse to accept SCO specifics in the later (from now onwards) GCC versions. If they do want the GCC compilers, they'll have to branch them and maintain them themselves...
But I agree, a clear point should be made, they cannot expect to keep on benefiting from our efforts while at the same time attacking the fundamentals of the free and open software community. They basically declared war on us but still expect us to do work for them willingly.
"We're not gaining ozone, we're just losing it less quickly," he said. Between 1997 and 2000, the average growth rate of the ozone hole has slowed by approximately 7 percent per decade, according to their calculations. It will take at least 40 or 50 years before all the ozone depletion stops and recovery begins, Newchurch said.
Let's not get our hopes up, 40 years until recovery begins, we are still going down... It makes you wonder how long it will take before the effects of global warming will be slowed down and reversed, not considering the enourmous lobbying of the entire industry, some governments ignoring the problem and nobody wants to trade in some of the luxury to help with the Kyoto accords. But that's an entirely different discussion.
You raise some valid points, but you need to come off your high horse. Back in the time when the USA was, what you call, a backward country, the US was all so pleased to get Fermi, Einstein fleeing totalitarian regimes in Europe (to name just a few). They did not come to their theories and research in isolation, but were a product of their environment and education in those countries. But they started or helped a developing industry and research in the US.
Later, the US even incited top leadingresearchers to go to the States, well in many cases, they had little choice, but it was better than being deported by the USSR.
In short, this has happened before (and was done by those that had little to protect or complain about, but are now the first to be scorned), and is happening again. Nothing new here, move along.
In times of world Economy, I am still dazzled to see that ppl seem to find reasons to protect their little countries (in fact, the country they are in can do anything they want, but everyone else should be good, unfair competition anyone?). I am just glad to see another alternative processor and in the long term, it can only benefit us with lower prices and better performance.
This is just another one of those MIT projects that makes it to slashdot. Just as you seem to have chain effect in 'peer review' processes, it's not because it is spectacular that it gets published, but mainly because it is from place X or Y.
Loads of universities create student projects but they basically give it the attention it deserves: they are student projects; practical definately, revolutionary, not by far. Their main purpose is to give students a direct experience with real life toy projects. Real life, because in those projects, several aspects from real systems are included. Toy because students do not have the time to really do the advanced design and testing a profesional project requires.
I do not think that the SCO case made them refuse the job. When I read the article, the SCO case gives them an excuse not to do the CD duplication (of a small number, 500, of CDs).
They lose almost nothing, while they are sucking up to M$, possibly gaining much more with the obfuscated licensing. I assume M$ will gladly pay their losses, considering the press coverage this thing will get.
They are not the only western soldiers in Congo, the Belgians are sending troops too (heck, another country the US loves to hate right now), but those are mainly restricted to medical teams and transport due to historical sensitivities in the former colony.
The real question is if governement agencies should be allowed to use expensive licensed software for which there is a viable alternative in the OS/FS community (read without paying required license fees). I think we have since long passed the time that we should believe that e.g running GNU/Linux in combination with OOo is at least as expensive as well know commercial products and can dismiss these statements as FUD.
I for one think they should not buy those products, though it is not any better where I live. In those cases, they are not only throwing our hardly earned (and often reluctantly paid) tax money out the window, which could be used for far better alternatives, they are also increasing the power of a monopolist, a self fulfulling prophecy.
I think this is the strength of the Australian proposal and the ISC tries to oppose (instead of using the money 'equally' (?) for the own population, it would now go to a few companies, from which a lot of them are foreign (not Australian).
Wether or not they are egyptians, we have decisions about content made for us by others who think they can decide "for the greater good" of all. Us westerers should stop looking down on other civilisations, we have it too as this article clearly shows. Germans can't see Nazis, Australians can't see red blood and Americans freak on the sight of sex.
I can understand the caution of the film board in Egypt, after all, they don't want to see another Karnak massacre by some bunch of extremists, backed by a number of news papers (which will deny all responsibility of course).
Avoiding extremist religious fanatics is hard as it is, so why wait until people get killed? In this case, I guess it is a small price to pay,...
Well basically I read the article with interest but messed up in one particular point: I used/addbot instead of/addannbot. k. I only noticed this after reading the article again this morning.
so/idscenario/addannbot
seems to do the job nicely:)
I am not that much interested in the gaming applications, rather than the experimental setup in itself. Basically a hobby from past research.
Being more verbose in the output would really be interesting.
Do you plan to put serveral ANN bots opposing each other? As I can see now, several ANN bots converge on shooting one and two (with some exceptions). I guess it would be interesting to see how 'characters' would be forming in bots when there is e.g. negative feedback. (e.g. avoid punishment at all cost vs. punishment does not make up for potential gain).
Slashdot Mirror
djees, don't be that narrow sighted, I don't even have to guess what part of the world you're from.
:)
There are countries where kids can drive a small motor cycle from 16 yrs onwards as long as it doesn't go faster than 25/40 (don't know exactly). If it goes faster, you need a drivers license and have to wear a helmet.
I don't think that the limiter is electronic since this is around for a few decades already, I assume it's controlling the injection (mix?).
'Pumping up' the bikes is a common practice here and the police have regular checks around schools to test the speed.
I do agree that when you're stopped by the police, then most often don't need a check to know if you drank alcohol,
Nah, most ppl that actually do drink and drive (have a habit) will have some switch installed hidden for the police. Teenagers with motorcycles and truck drivers have all kinds of technical restrictions built in/imposed and it's common knowledge that a large part of them has such a contraption.
:-/).
The police normally don't bother to take the vehicle apart to find the hidden switch...
I would have to agree that more testing and more testing is the only successful way (like they do over here around new year (december/january: drinking under influence drops significantly, only to rise again in february
We have 7 years of the same coming up
How did this get modded as insightful? This reasoning is exactly what the M$ programs are about. Being an (ex)tutor myself, these formats are not good and are too (ego)centric.
Why would one need to save to a platform specific format and not to a platform independent format? M$ users can just as well save to pdf, rtf or whatever with their programs. Those documents could then be read with the platform of choice and in most cases with the viewer of choice. I for one was not interested in rebooting my development machine to check the submissions (project reports etc) or going to a lab to find a free M$ machine.
Students I was guiding knew this and submitted their files in a platform independent format (at the end OOo). It also made them think why and to what purpose they actually use e.g. M$ Word: In most cases, it's an elephant that is used to squat a mosquito: you don't need such a monster program to type in a small report/question of a couple of pages or an abstract of the project.
As for the story, I can just conclude that the teacher was underqualified: why would you want a ppt file for watching somebody elses presentation???
Especially with the advent of OOo, I can see no reason whatsoever why ppl (even the less tech savvy) should use M$ formats...
It is not because some project is being abandonned, that the code that was produced in the project is dead.
Often much of the code or ideas are taken over and incorporated into other or new projects. To my experience, it often pays off to start anew. And if in the process another branch is created, so what; I am programming in the first case because I need something which is not available and because I find it fun to do.
Sometimes, developers; even though they don't have time to actively persue development; consider their projects as their children, and do not like giving it out of their hands. Reusing code into a new project is therefore often a good choice.
This is IMHO one of the good points of OS/FS, you don't have to bother with the ground work each time you decide to do something, you can just go out, find some functionality you need and write your added value.
As far as I have read the SF policy, archiving OS/FS is as important as hosting the active projects. Once you add your code in SF, you cannot remove it again.
I am an active Linux user and developer, so what. I just think it is a pitty that some ppl, especially from the free/unix side still have to proclaim in such a way that their flavour is better and given an informative discription.
:-/ Let's kiss and make up :) [hm, come to think of it, since I guess the author is a 'guy', I'll drop the kissing]
Just when I have the impression that a lot of the distro wars are over (or am I just passively ignoring them), some BSD zealot has to attack Linux. I have the impression that the author of the site/tool used these words sarcastically, but the submitter of the story should have had better judgement than to just take over the heading of the page.
I want to try BSD from the moment I have some more time (possibly in some emulator or on an old box initially) and I don't care that much what *n*x system I am working on, especially when I consider the alternative. This kind of stuff does not really help when the *n*x playground if fighting like small children while big brother is sitting by and enjoying the spectacle.
Hm, I'm taking myself too seriously again
Nice tool, though I don't see the real innovative in this simular things are available (dunno for which *n*x but I would guess they are pretty platform independent).
Well, for this time, I have to agree with some of the 'Flamebait' moderated posts, this is a very lame question...
...
So, you are basically asking why you are no longer able to buy obsolete hardware (3 button mouse)? Especially considering the fact, that for the same price, you get a mouse which offers the exact same functionality (3 buttons) even more, it offers a scroll wheel (i.e. 5 buttons).
Basically you are wondering why you get more for the same price, because this is what it is: even though you are offered 5 buttons, noone is forceing you to use them. Configure your system to use only 3 (press the wheel as you point out).
I would assume that most people opt for these systems and since the 3 button mouse only has a subset of the functionality of this wheel mouse, it is not worth the effort to produce them.
Makes sense to me,
Well, this is about the most stupid comment I made. Let's have some more coffee...
This somewhat seems to me as job-creation from the military. Let's scare ppl so we'll get tons of money to spend in the next years...
...
This being said, I wonder if there should not be something as acceptable privacy. From what is said in the article, the general fears that countries might attack the US satelites in orbit.
Oh heck. could you blame them? Consider a country like, yes, China or even some other (Arab (?), they have money enough and are pissed) country knowing that at any time some satelites are orbitting and inspecting their military bases. Satelites that were designed and launched for this sole purpose mind you...
I have no clue if China has these things above the USA (or Europe and let's not forget Russia), but for all I am concerned, countries should have the right to get those things out of the sky when they get a shot at it. Seems only fair to me, those things should never have been there in the first place: for some reason, a spy airplane is bad and a satelite is fine,
If this is the case, and 'war' starts in space: who would be to blame? The guys putting those 'prying eyes' in the sky or the ones protecting their privacy/country and taking them down.
I have a pretty good idea what the general's view would be...
How is the ISS slowing the US down. Fact of the matter is that the US is not willing to pour lots of money into an expensive program which does not yield any direct revenue (which is basically the same reasoning the EU and Russia is following).
I would rather think that the ISS is one of the first programs that _really_ helps space exploration forward: not only does it provide a good permanent base in space for continuous research, but more importantly, it finally unites a large part of the space travelling world in one program (out of pure financial need). I don't know about you, but I would call this one of the major achievements of the ISS.
And yes, I've been to the Cape Canaveral and I was ashamed of the language some of the engineers (people that you would expect to have a decent education, but perhaps they were deliberately screened out to give tours) were using: basically cold war talk and pure propaganda (we do not have the lead in commercial launchings but we have a firm resolve to get this in the first years).
I hope that ISS helps showing that together we can achieve more out there than alone (yes, I've been raised with a weekly Star Trek dose).
hear hear!
a CDR 650/700 Mb
a DVD[+-]R: 4.7 salesman Gb
= 4.7*1000*1000*1000/1024 = 4589843 kb (= 4.37 Gb)
AFAIK base-10 is just plain cheating.
I've seen a lot of comments which are mainly outdated and ill informed.
... and 3 for engineering and some medicin studies). The candidatures are not really accepted as a final degree, but a way to the licenses (hardly anybody stopped studying after a candidature). These are the broad lines.
First off, indeed, some European countries did not have a Anglo-Saxon Ms/Bs system in the past. I believe some countries adherred to a more German system, where you had the 'candidatures' (after 2 years) and the 'licenses' (after 2 or 3 years; 2 for 'normal' studies, e.g. history, archeology,
One of the formost problems with this was the diversity of the degrees. You typically had 'universities' and 'high schools (=/= american high-schools). For some long term degrees (4/5 years) the degree of a high-school did not get accepted abroad (including some engineering degrees), while the university degrees were universally (pun) accepted.
Then there were the differences between countries... Over the last decade, countries started to simplify and reform their studies. If I remember correctly, Sweden had at some point over 100 different engineering degrees.
More recently (and which has been the cause for quite some protest), all the EU countries signed an agreement to take up the Master/Bachelor system (Bologna Accords). As far as I know, this system is currently being introduced (if you start now, you should be in this system) and is retro-active (if you graduated in the old system, you can call yourself Master).
Of course, there are still discussions going on (and I basically lost the thread by now) between lobbying groups (which are sometimes powerful and recruite off campus) that e.g. think that an engineer of a university should be an MSc while one from a high-school should be a 'simple' Master (and so on and so forth). [some weven wanted to have high-schools only deliver bachelor degrees while leaving masters to the universities]. I will not go into the ramafications of these discussions, it's enough to say that if some ppl had their way, it would be more chaos again.
I just hope the politicians get their act together and for once, take some rational decisions, once and for all making the higher education homogeneous. After all, if there would be an objective difference between degree X from school A and degree Y from university B, I assume recuiters would take up on this (as they already do now for some degrees that are offered on both universities and high-schools).
But in the discussion about degrees, all rationality seems to be gone out the window at some times... Some people seem to like protecting the education and degree with all kinds of laws, thus decoupling 'capabilities' from 'person' but linking 'capabilities' with 'degree/institution'.
As for your question, if you come to the EU for studies, pick a university with a good reputation. You can hardly miss. Another note that I want to add (from my limited experience with US degrees) is that the EU educations (also depending from institution to institution) put more weight on theory (mathematics).
Well, it's rather a complex explanation,but you might start with this this link, watch the episode and then contemplate again over the relevance of this signature in an IT dominated envorinment...
...
Google would have helped you on the way though,
gtk is another site that is protesting. Good though, if you look at the rubbish pattens which are already registered (illegally) in Europe, ...
I've been an avid fan of this comic book for over a decade or so (at the rate of one release a year, there are currently 14/15 comic books, it depends if you count the overview).
For the ppl that want (some) more background: the comic book is written (scenarie) by Jean Van Hamme, who has also worked on Thorgal and Largo Winch (btw, the series does not do the comic book justice), just to name the most well know ones (I am personally a fan of the chninkel. Van Hamme (a professor in Brussels IIRC) is one of the best scenario writers (with the ever dark Dufaux).
The drawings of XIII are done by Vance, who also worked on Bruce J Hawker (and some other high profiled titles, the names escape me at this moment).
Currently, the story arc of the comic book has stopped (a bit), mainly because the identify of number I (yes XIII stands for a number) has been shown. However, the new comic book seems to identify that all is not what it seems and new conspiracies await (showing high ranking CIA/FBI and military personal having succeeded in the coup d'etat in the US).
The first cycle (if I can call it that) was mainly driven by the search for the identity of the main character, finding himself in situations where his life is changed in a blink of an eye and where nothing is what it is and can be trusted.
Furthermore, the issue of the identity of XIII is still not entirely clear, nor is the role of some of the seemingly allies.
the GPL offers 4 freedoms
1 Freedom to use. A GPL licensed program can be used for any purpose whatsoever.
2 Freedom to copy and distribute. You are allowed to make exact copies and distribute these, in both source and binary code, as long as you grant the same right to the person you distribute it too.
3 Freedom to modify. You are allowed to modify the code in whatever way you want.
4 Freedom to copy and distribute modifications. Again, the distribution has to be in source and binary code, and it has to grant the same right to the person it is distributed to.
What you are proposing is breaking the 1st freedom; it is not because they claim the GPL is invalid that we believe so and should break it. A more valid request is IMHO the one GCC did, is to refuse to accept SCO specifics in the later (from now onwards) GCC versions. If they do want the GCC compilers, they'll have to branch them and maintain them themselves...
But I agree, a clear point should be made, they cannot expect to keep on benefiting from our efforts while at the same time attacking the fundamentals of the free and open software community. They basically declared war on us but still expect us to do work for them willingly.
Let's not get our hopes up, 40 years until recovery begins, we are still going down... It makes you wonder how long it will take before the effects of global warming will be slowed down and reversed, not considering the enourmous lobbying of the entire industry, some governments ignoring the problem and nobody wants to trade in some of the luxury to help with the Kyoto accords. But that's an entirely different discussion.
You raise some valid points, but you need to come off your high horse. Back in the time when the USA was, what you call, a backward country, the US was all so pleased to get Fermi, Einstein fleeing totalitarian regimes in Europe (to name just a few). They did not come to their theories and research in isolation, but were a product of their environment and education in those countries. But they started or helped a developing industry and research in the US.
Later, the US even incited top leading researchers to go to the States, well in many cases, they had little choice, but it was better than being deported by the USSR.
In short, this has happened before (and was done by those that had little to protect or complain about, but are now the first to be scorned), and is happening again. Nothing new here, move along.
In times of world Economy, I am still dazzled to see that ppl seem to find reasons to protect their little countries (in fact, the country they are in can do anything they want, but everyone else should be good, unfair competition anyone?). I am just glad to see another alternative processor and in the long term, it can only benefit us with lower prices and better performance.
This is just another one of those MIT projects that makes it to slashdot. Just as you seem to have chain effect in 'peer review' processes, it's not because it is spectacular that it gets published, but mainly because it is from place X or Y.
Loads of universities create student projects but they basically give it the attention it deserves: they are student projects; practical definately, revolutionary, not by far. Their main purpose is to give students a direct experience with real life toy projects. Real life, because in those projects, several aspects from real systems are included. Toy because students do not have the time to really do the advanced design and testing a profesional project requires.
I do not think that the SCO case made them refuse the job. When I read the article, the SCO case gives them an excuse not to do the CD duplication (of a small number, 500, of CDs).
They lose almost nothing, while they are sucking up to M$, possibly gaining much more with the obfuscated licensing. I assume M$ will gladly pay their losses, considering the press coverage this thing will get.
They are not the only western soldiers in Congo, the Belgians are sending troops too (heck, another country the US loves to hate right now), but those are mainly restricted to medical teams and transport due to historical sensitivities in the former colony.
The real question is if governement agencies should be allowed to use expensive licensed software for which there is a viable alternative in the OS/FS community (read without paying required license fees). I think we have since long passed the time that we should believe that e.g running GNU/Linux in combination with OOo is at least as expensive as well know commercial products and can dismiss these statements as FUD.
I for one think they should not buy those products, though it is not any better where I live. In those cases, they are not only throwing our hardly earned (and often reluctantly paid) tax money out the window, which could be used for far better alternatives, they are also increasing the power of a monopolist, a self fulfulling prophecy.
I think this is the strength of the Australian proposal and the ISC tries to oppose (instead of using the money 'equally' (?) for the own population, it would now go to a few companies, from which a lot of them are foreign (not Australian).
Wether or not they are egyptians, we have decisions about content made for us by others who think they can decide "for the greater good" of all. Us westerers should stop looking down on other civilisations, we have it too as this article clearly shows. Germans can't see Nazis, Australians can't see red blood and Americans freak on the sight of sex.
...
I can understand the caution of the film board in Egypt, after all, they don't want to see another Karnak massacre by some bunch of extremists, backed by a number of news papers (which will deny all responsibility of course).
Avoiding extremist religious fanatics is hard as it is, so why wait until people get killed? In this case, I guess it is a small price to pay,
Nice, it this 'mod' also available, because I find this one actually more interesting than the one you posted.
:)
I think I would be able to spend quite some time to see these bots evolving
I guess there is only one way to find out
Well basically I read the article with interest but messed up in one particular point: I used /addbot instead of /addannbot. k. I only noticed this after reading the article again this morning.
/idscenario /addannbot
:)
so
seems to do the job nicely
I am not that much interested in the gaming applications, rather than the experimental setup in itself. Basically a hobby from past research.
Being more verbose in the output would really be interesting.
Do you plan to put serveral ANN bots opposing each other? As I can see now, several ANN bots converge on shooting one and two (with some exceptions). I guess it would be interesting to see how 'characters' would be forming in bots when there is e.g. negative feedback.
(e.g. avoid punishment at all cost vs. punishment does not make up for potential gain).