Since they are only used by the US governement and US schools
There is at least one non-US.edu domain: mm.edu..gov is quite US-only, though.
But it's strange that this happens now, when most other national top-domain has lost their "national" feeling, with USians controlling domains like.nu where a lot of Swedish companies (and even branches of the government) have sites (since "nu" means "now" in Swedish).
Oh, well, perhaps we'll see non-US domains under.us? That would be the perfect retribution...
Yeah, pm0.net currently spam me at about 10 messages per day as well. Currently I've configured my procmail filter to return all their mail to postmaster@mindsharedesign.com (that's their parent domain). I tried abuse@ first, but that address bounces.
This is so stupid it is almost funny... I mean, I enter my phone numbers in my mobile's phone directory so that I can use names to dial without having to remember their numbers. Why would I ever want to use a phone number instead of a name?
Now, if they want to invent something useful, then please give us domain names in Unicode instead, so that I won't have to mutilate my letters to fit the DNS.
You're confusing patents with copyright. You patent algorithms, and copyright protect code.
Your code is protected by copyright, which is valid in all countries that have signed the Berne convention, so Microsoft can't just rip it. And if your code has been importen into the US, I guess it can be considered prior art, and thus the algorithm behind it isn't patentable.
Debian does not ship with the latest versions simply because they came out after 2.2 hit freeze. Freeze means (basically) that no new versions are included, and only bugs and security holes are fixed. That's why those fixes were backported.
No matter if he does, what he says is the truth, contrib and non-free are NOT part of Debian, only main is official Debian. However, updated Netscape packages are on the way.
Almost all dealers selling DVD players here in Oslo (Norway) advertise region-free players. I bought one such device, a REC, and it works just fine without region coding, without the need for hidden menus.
There's no contradiction in that. You can license a program under the GPL and allow the use of Qt in it. It's just that you need to explicitly state that it is allowed.
Because if you could link to anything you could just add a simple call to a library in the code, release that change under the GPL, and then implement all your new cool features in your library, which would not be covered by the GPL, but would add much of the functionality to the program.
The GPL is written to make such things impossible.
No, there is no problem here. It is perfectly legal to distribute the same code under different licenses. The LGPLed libraries that you are referring to can be distributed under both LGPL and GPL. At the same time.
5) So... When Debian is including Qt in its main distribution, that makes it legal for *others* to distribute all the KDE apps in Debian package form, for Debian users. As long as it is not an official part of Debian?
The GPL specificially mentions that the output of the program need not be covered by the license of the program itself, and for the GCC, this is spelled out in clear text - a program compiled with GCC is not automatically covered by the GPL. (Of course, there might be other factors that make your software having to be licensed under the GPL, but this is not one of them).
Disallowing reverse-engineering of software products or file formats is illegal under the laws of many countries; Microsoft just wouldn't be able to sue you, unless you actually infringe on any of their copyrights or patents (i.e use their code).
Disclaimer: I am not a lawyer, and I don't know the laws of many countries, above is what I understand of Swedish and Norwegian law.
It's not entirely trivial to convert something designed to fit the inner workings of another program (in this case, MSWord), to fit your own. Just see how hard it is to get other conversions correct.
I simply think that it need to be made more useful, and especially there need to be more unique stuff invented that truly makes it interesting. I mean, you can play games with a dice, look at naked ladies in real life, read paper-back newspapers, order stuff over the telephone, etc. What need to be done is to invent new stuff, not just new ways of doing the old stuff.
I cannot really see the problem in all this. Good information sites are worth paying for, just like I see no problem in paying for a paper-based newspaper, I see no problem in paying for a web-based one. I read web-based newspaper quite often (living abroad, I can keep in touch with home news quite easily via the web), and would be glad to pay for it, if it meant getting rid of the tons of animated ad banners (which I filter, at the moment).
Yeah, I use grdb, but it only gives you that much of the GNOME looks (colors and fonts). The widgets still does not look as the ones I have set up in GNOME.
Yeah, but are there that many other ports of the X libraries needed to actually compile X software to run natively (versus to run software on other machine but just displaying them on Windows)?
Well, IMHO, the most irritating "feature" of the GNOME Vs. KDE war is that they aren't very well at working together. Personally, I run GNOME. I want any Qt/KDE apps I like to use (there are a few), to look like my GNOME apps, but I can't do that. A pity.
(But then again, I can't get the Motif or Xt or whatever programs to look like my GNOME programs either, so...)
Slashdot Mirror
Since they are only used by the US governement and US schools
There is at least one non-US .edu domain: mm.edu. .gov is quite US-only, though.
But it's strange that this happens now, when most other national top-domain has lost their "national" feeling, with USians controlling domains like .nu where a lot of Swedish companies (and even branches of the government) have sites (since "nu" means "now" in Swedish).
Oh, well, perhaps we'll see non-US domains under .us? That would be the perfect retribution...
Yeah, pm0.net currently spam me at about 10 messages per day as well. Currently I've configured my procmail filter to return all their mail to postmaster@mindsharedesign.com (that's their parent domain). I tried abuse@ first, but that address bounces.
Why can't someone just shoot these bastards?
They have tried, and no-one has yet re-created the true SID sound.
Now, if they want to invent something useful, then please give us domain names in Unicode instead, so that I won't have to mutilate my letters to fit the DNS.
Sure, that's the way LM Ericsson started in the telephone business (but the other way around, he patented the telephone in Sweden).
Your code is protected by copyright, which is valid in all countries that have signed the Berne convention, so Microsoft can't just rip it. And if your code has been importen into the US, I guess it can be considered prior art, and thus the algorithm behind it isn't patentable.
Fuzzy math seems to be what the whole USian voting system relies on...
Although I'm an Opera employee, the viewes expressed are my own.
Debian does not ship with the latest versions simply because they came out after 2.2 hit freeze. Freeze means (basically) that no new versions are included, and only bugs and security holes are fixed. That's why those fixes were backported.
No matter if he does, what he says is the truth, contrib and non-free are NOT part of Debian, only main is official Debian. However, updated Netscape packages are on the way.
It does sport Macrovision, though.
There's no contradiction in that. You can license a program under the GPL and allow the use of Qt in it. It's just that you need to explicitly state that it is allowed.
The GPL is written to make such things impossible.
You will only be violating the GPL if you were to distribute such a binary. Compiling it for yourself is (AFAICT) not a problem.
No, there is no problem here. It is perfectly legal to distribute the same code under different licenses. The LGPLed libraries that you are referring to can be distributed under both LGPL and GPL. At the same time.
(I'm curious to know)
The GPL specificially mentions that the output of the program need not be covered by the license of the program itself, and for the GCC, this is spelled out in clear text - a program compiled with GCC is not automatically covered by the GPL. (Of course, there might be other factors that make your software having to be licensed under the GPL, but this is not one of them).
Disclaimer: I am not a lawyer, and I don't know the laws of many countries, above is what I understand of Swedish and Norwegian law.
It's not entirely trivial to convert something designed to fit the inner workings of another program (in this case, MSWord), to fit your own. Just see how hard it is to get other conversions correct.
I simply think that it need to be made more useful, and especially there need to be more unique stuff invented that truly makes it interesting. I mean, you can play games with a dice, look at naked ladies in real life, read paper-back newspapers, order stuff over the telephone, etc. What need to be done is to invent new stuff, not just new ways of doing the old stuff.
I cannot really see the problem in all this. Good information sites are worth paying for, just like I see no problem in paying for a paper-based newspaper, I see no problem in paying for a web-based one. I read web-based newspaper quite often (living abroad, I can keep in touch with home news quite easily via the web), and would be glad to pay for it, if it meant getting rid of the tons of animated ad banners (which I filter, at the moment).
But I guess that's life...
Yeah, but are there that many other ports of the X libraries needed to actually compile X software to run natively (versus to run software on other machine but just displaying them on Windows)?
(But then again, I can't get the Motif or Xt or whatever programs to look like my GNOME programs either, so...)
Well, there is a XFree/CygWin port in progress, so you might very well be able to do that soon.