I'd say he acted like an uninformed but generally good-natured cop. I guess "dick" can mean detective, so there's some ambiguity about your intent. While it's pretty clear that the cop was personally offended (and that too easily) and definitely uninformed about the law he was supposedly enforcing, he didn't do any of the very evil and nasty things that cops all too often do. Grading on a curve, for his peer group, I'd give him a good solid B.
Umm, no. If you look, it was a cloture vote on an amendment which would restore the right of habeas corpus to U.S. prisoners. It failed, and thus the Constitutional provision of the right of habeas corpus remains legislatively suspended until and unless effective judicial review occurs.
Equally sad is that the system is so broken that upholding the Constitution, as all of those nay votes took an oath to do, requires a 60% supermajority.
SCOTUS disagrees with you. Arguably, it disagrees with the U.S. Constitution as well, but then SCOTUS decided that SCOTUS is the final authority on the meaning and interpretation of the USCons, so we're all fucked.
It's not bizarre at all to use the courts to prevent erosion of liberty. That is, after all, one of the principal functions of courts, and the central purpose behind using any license at all, as opposed to making a public domain release, is to allow recourse to the court system in cases of abuse.
Both you and the commentator to whom you reply have missed one crucial fact: The contributions submitted under the dual license terms which remain part of the file are licensed under the dual license terms. Until and unless every contributor has explicitly given permission to re-release the file under novel terms, the dual license still applies.
It is an issue because other people have contributed to the code under the dual license, and they have a legal right to expect that their contributions will remain under the dual license. The original author does not have the right to release the code base incorporating their changes under novel terms.
I tried iTunes a couple of years ago, and it was lame, but workable. I tried it again just last week, and it is now completely unusable.
What is the first thing you want to do with a music player? Put some music on it. Well, there's no easy way to do this in iTunes. You have to build a music library by searching disk. What do you do if you move from one storage network to another? Uninstall iTunes, reinstall, and search the new disk space? What do you do if you add some tracks to disk? There's no obvious incremental search. Drag-n-drop did nothing. Searching menus was fruitless.
Sorry, for all of their supposed ease of use, in the monomaniacal pursuit of iTunes store sales, they've rendered their players useless as shipped. The only reasonable thing to do with my ipod is to flash it with a basic MP3 player firmware. There are several for this purpose. Then you can use it like any other USB drive. Dragndrop, OS-neutral.
Ah but, you have overlooked one crucial point: The "triviality" of building an anonymous web service depends on public-key cryptography, which is, upon your assumptions, a foundation of sand. Quantum decryptors will track you down with the fearless inevitability of a pack of ravenous velociraptors.
That would be fine, except that other people have since contributed to the code under the dual license. Unless he has permission from ALL of those people to relicense their code, he would have to remove all of their contributions before redistributing it under new license terms.
That would be quixotic, and irrelevant. Once the techniques are known, quantum computers can be built by anyone with the will and budget. It would be trivial to build an anonymous web-service to do decryptions with your home-built device -- and highly profitable -- so it will, inevitably, be done, if the market is created by an artificially imposed abolition.
Removing the BSD license header rescinds your right to use the code. That's why de Raadt makes the claim that moving the BSD code to a pure GPL sans BSD-dual license is a violation of copyright law.
He makes this claim in an effort to protect your freedom to use the code as you see fit, without the restrictions imposed by the GPL. Many people who are more interested in taking your freedoms away than in protecting them will naturally attack him personally as a result. But he is hardened against such puerile attacks, with layers of hot-forged titanium-tungsten alloy sheathing forming a low-explosive reactive armor sandwich.
One might say the same of dark matter; however, I find dark matter much more acceptable than inflation, and IIa is also inconsistent with dark matter.
Actually, inflation seems to fail of Occam's Razor alone. The notion that the universe expanded faster than the speed of light is a bit of a....dare I say....stretch?
There is such a meta-theory, and it's called experimental science. Since IIa is inconsistent with both dark matter and inflation, progress is best served by allocating investigative resources to other theories. Thus, this is a practically useful result. Moreover, it may form the template from which other results, which eliminate larger classes of string theories, can be derived by abstraction, generalization, or clever virtuoso tricks. Ultimately, some number of string theories will remain without a sufficient refutation to discount their investigation. The number may be large, small, one or zero. If the number is over-unity, they may admit abstraction, such that a single formalism can be used to make all measurable predictions of any/all theories. This is sheer speculation, but it is consistent with the history of the theory. But even if such an abstraction never emerged, and we were stuck with multiple multually inconsistent theories, each consistent with all practicable observations, this would not be a terrible thing. There's no reason to think that science can determine all physical truths unambiguously -- quite the contrary.
> Electric Universe is a scientific theory that is so bad it doesn't even deserve to be called pseudo-science.
Patent-leather science then?
Actually, I think the notions propounded by the advocates of the "Electric Universe" are just classical electrodynamics applied to inter-planetary and inter-stellar scales. The main point of these advocates boils down to: Please stop forgetting about electrostatics when you look at the sky. Seems sensible to me. Now as to whether or not any specific phenomenon for which someone proposes an electro-magnetic mechanism is correctly thus understood -- well, that's going to be a separate, open question in each specific case. What is truly anti-scientific is to discount an explanation on an ad hominem basis, or because it is offensive to the traditions of the culture -- including the inbred culture of peer review, particularly when competing theories represent a threat to one's funding sources.
That's funny. Every war on Afghanistan has resulted in increased terrorism. Your argument appears to be that the white guys just haven't killed enough people yet. I guess that's true: Once you've killed everyone, they'll stop fighting back.
They've seen extensive use. For example, when the Iraqi army was retreating from Kuwait, the U.S. killed them all with FAE bombs. If you've never been to hell, you might enjoy seeing the pictures of the incinerated people frozen in place. The Russians used them to eliminate the city of Grozny in Chechnya. The ordinance used by the U.S. to penetrate the mountain retreats of Tora Bora were built on related principles, but they are really a distinct class of device, being designed around HE rather than FA as the primary source of energy.
Slavery is simply 100% taxation. Your great-grandparents were free. Your grandparents were 10% slave. Your parents were 30% slave, you are 50% slave, and your children will be 75% slave. I doubt you will have any grandchildren, unless you are already quite old.
Intelligent, educated, and honest people do not and have never believed that 9/11 was anything but a pretext for the invasion of Iraq. At least Colin Powell has apologized. Now it only remains to have him hung under the terms of the Nuremberg Charter for Crimes against Peace.
Slashdot Mirror
It is typical, in the U.S., for a victorious civil defendant to receive court costs and attorney fees.
> acted like an uninformed dick
I'd say he acted like an uninformed but generally good-natured cop. I guess "dick" can mean detective, so there's some ambiguity about your intent. While it's pretty clear that the cop was personally offended (and that too easily) and definitely uninformed about the law he was supposedly enforcing, he didn't do any of the very evil and nasty things that cops all too often do. Grading on a curve, for his peer group, I'd give him a good solid B.
Umm, no. If you look, it was a cloture vote on an amendment which would restore the right of habeas corpus to U.S. prisoners. It failed, and thus the Constitutional provision of the right of habeas corpus remains legislatively suspended until and unless effective judicial review occurs.
Equally sad is that the system is so broken that upholding the Constitution, as all of those nay votes took an oath to do, requires a 60% supermajority.
> Sure, the U.S. is better than a Soviet gulag or Saddam Hussein's torture rooms.
How, exactly?
SCOTUS disagrees with you. Arguably, it disagrees with the U.S. Constitution as well, but then SCOTUS decided that SCOTUS is the final authority on the meaning and interpretation of the USCons, so we're all fucked.
It's not bizarre at all to use the courts to prevent erosion of liberty. That is, after all, one of the principal functions of courts, and the central purpose behind using any license at all, as opposed to making a public domain release, is to allow recourse to the court system in cases of abuse.
Both you and the commentator to whom you reply have missed one crucial fact: The contributions submitted under the dual license terms which remain part of the file are licensed under the dual license terms. Until and unless every contributor has explicitly given permission to re-release the file under novel terms, the dual license still applies.
It is an issue because other people have contributed to the code under the dual license, and they have a legal right to expect that their contributions will remain under the dual license. The original author does not have the right to release the code base incorporating their changes under novel terms.
Arrogance and rudeness discredit any substantive points you might have otherwise made.
You get some credit for wry humor, however.
In 6 months, it will probably cost about the same in Bhat, but be nearly twice as expensive in dollars.
I tried iTunes a couple of years ago, and it was lame, but workable. I tried it again just last week, and it is now completely unusable.
What is the first thing you want to do with a music player? Put some music on it. Well, there's no easy way to do this in iTunes. You have to build a music library by searching disk. What do you do if you move from one storage network to another? Uninstall iTunes, reinstall, and search the new disk space? What do you do if you add some tracks to disk? There's no obvious incremental search. Drag-n-drop did nothing. Searching menus was fruitless.
Sorry, for all of their supposed ease of use, in the monomaniacal pursuit of iTunes store sales, they've rendered their players useless as shipped. The only reasonable thing to do with my ipod is to flash it with a basic MP3 player firmware. There are several for this purpose. Then you can use it like any other USB drive. Dragndrop, OS-neutral.
Ah but, you have overlooked one crucial point: The "triviality" of building an anonymous web service depends on public-key cryptography, which is, upon your assumptions, a foundation of sand. Quantum decryptors will track you
down with the fearless inevitability of a pack of ravenous velociraptors.
That would be fine, except that other people have since contributed to the code under the dual license. Unless he has permission from ALL of those people to relicense their code, he would have to remove all of their contributions before redistributing it under new license terms.
That would be quixotic, and irrelevant. Once the techniques are known, quantum computers can be built by anyone with the will and budget. It would be trivial to build an anonymous web-service to do decryptions with your home-built device -- and highly profitable -- so it will, inevitably, be done, if the market is created by an artificially imposed abolition.
Removing the BSD license header rescinds your right to use the code. That's why de Raadt makes the
claim that moving the BSD code to a pure GPL sans BSD-dual license is a violation of copyright law.
He makes this claim in an effort to protect your freedom to use the code as you see fit, without the
restrictions imposed by the GPL. Many people who are more interested in taking your freedoms away
than in protecting them will naturally attack him personally as a result. But he is hardened against
such puerile attacks, with layers of hot-forged titanium-tungsten alloy sheathing forming a low-explosive
reactive armor sandwich.
One might say the same of dark matter; however, I find dark matter much more acceptable than inflation, and IIa is also inconsistent with dark matter.
Actually, inflation seems to fail of Occam's Razor alone. The notion that the universe expanded faster than the speed of light is a bit of a....dare I say....stretch?
There is such a meta-theory, and it's called experimental science. Since IIa is inconsistent with both dark matter and inflation, progress is best served by allocating investigative resources to other theories. Thus, this is a practically useful result. Moreover, it may form the template from which other results, which eliminate larger classes of string theories, can be derived by abstraction, generalization, or clever virtuoso tricks. Ultimately, some number of string theories will remain without a sufficient refutation to discount their investigation. The number may be large, small, one or zero. If the number is over-unity, they may admit abstraction, such that a single formalism can be used to make all measurable predictions of any/all theories. This is sheer speculation, but it is consistent with the history of the theory. But even if such an abstraction never emerged, and we were stuck with multiple multually inconsistent theories, each consistent with all practicable observations, this would not be a terrible thing. There's no reason to think that science can determine all physical truths unambiguously -- quite the contrary.
> Electric Universe is a scientific theory that is so bad it doesn't even deserve to be called pseudo-science.
Patent-leather science then?
Actually, I think the notions propounded by the advocates of the "Electric Universe" are just classical electrodynamics applied to inter-planetary and inter-stellar scales. The main point of these advocates boils down to: Please stop forgetting about electrostatics when you look at the sky. Seems sensible to me. Now as to whether or not any specific phenomenon for which someone proposes an electro-magnetic mechanism is correctly thus understood -- well, that's going to be a separate, open question in each specific case. What is truly anti-scientific is to discount an explanation on an ad hominem basis, or because it is offensive to the traditions of the culture -- including the inbred culture of peer review, particularly when competing theories represent a threat to one's funding sources.
That's funny. Every war on Afghanistan has resulted in increased terrorism. Your argument appears to be that the white guys just haven't killed enough people yet. I guess that's true: Once you've killed everyone, they'll stop fighting back.
> Iran
plus ca change, plus la meme chose
They've seen extensive use. For example, when the Iraqi army was retreating from Kuwait, the U.S. killed them all with FAE bombs. If you've never been to hell, you might enjoy seeing the pictures of the incinerated people frozen in place. The Russians used them to eliminate the city of Grozny in Chechnya. The ordinance used by the U.S. to penetrate the mountain retreats of Tora Bora were built on related principles, but they are really a distinct class of device, being designed around HE rather than FA as the primary source of energy.
Slavery is simply 100% taxation. Your great-grandparents were free. Your grandparents were 10% slave. Your parents were 30% slave, you are 50% slave, and your children will be 75% slave. I doubt you will have any grandchildren, unless you are already quite old.
Intelligent, educated, and honest people do not and have never believed that 9/11 was anything but a pretext for the invasion of Iraq. At least Colin Powell has apologized. Now it only remains to have him hung under the terms of the Nuremberg Charter for Crimes against Peace.
> Isn't it ironic...
Big Brother is not amused.