Mm... no, I actually know a lot more people that use SF rather than 'scifi'. Mind you, I'd never have parsed the headline as being to do with San Francisco, simply because it comes after science fiction in the list of things I associate with that abbreviation.:) Each to their own.
PA won't charge you for the printing - they just make sure you get ripped off in other ways. Your friend, unfortunately, picked a really bad place to get it printed.:/ Partly because most bookstores won't stock them (some won't even special order them, due to the antics of the authors), but also because from all accounts claiming "I've got a book published by PA" is actually a minus point.
To be honest, if you have the cash you'd be better off paying for a real freelance editor to go over it, real cover art, and a real printer. PA edit very badly (if at all), prefer you to supply the art, and do an extremely bad job of the printing.
Vanity press isn't related to on-demand - vanity press essentially just means you pay them for printing your book, rather than the way it should be. Most of them tend to be POD, though, because it's much cheaper for them.
Since in order to publish it, the volunteer who submitted it as "Travis Tea" would have had to sign a contract saying that they wrote it all. Which they didn't.
Besides, it kind of works better this way - PA get bad press, and whatever expense they might have spent on "reviewing" it (about 50 cents), and people get directed at a more honest "we'll take what you give us and print it" place (Lulu).
(PA don't charge you for the printing, though, so the other reply's not correct.)
You're correct that it's against the spirit of the GPL - but it's still the direction some companies are going in. "You can have the source, but you won't be able to run any modified code."
Not that I'm defending her, particularly - since I don't know either side of the story - but it does occur to me that that kind of stuff is probably best done face to face, or at worst through email, rather than on a public journal. Otherwise people are going to get embarrassed and annoyed.
Getting rid of GCHQ would make it much much easier to blow up Big Ben, if you were so inclined.
I think making the assumption that the terrorists aren't particularly educated is dangerous, but to answer your question, GCHQ is quite well known within Britain. Most people are aware of what it is and what it sod.es
The only thing that this'll be useful for, for me anyway, is installing software that companies release RPM-only, binary only that don't have Open Source alternatives.
From the comments here, it seems quite a few people here have only tried games like Diplomacy, chess etc. You're missing a whole other world of games which aren't chess.:-) Some of the hand-moderated games, in particular, have incredibly detailed worlds and plotlines. Ever wanted to be in a novel?
You might want to start here, with the PBM list. Or you could drop by the rec.games.pbm newsgroup for recommendations, chat etc. (Actually, do that anyway.) You might even consider looking at Flagship. There used to be a policy of sending a sample copy to interested folk, although I don't know if that policy still exists.
From games I've played, Lizards! is good fun; Madhouse run some good games, and have extremely good customer service. You've also got Middle Earth Games running various LoTR games.
Actually, some combination of tactics would be interesting. Keep it on an encrypted volume; if people take it away from you and start demanding keys, claim that you did "dd if=/dev/random of=/dev/hdb" which is why it looks random.
I suspect there are gaping holes in that, but there you go.
When I looked at student editions of a few programs (can't remember which ones, this was some years ago now), the deal was that when you stopped being a student you had to switch your licence to a "full" one.
You might want to double-check that yours don't say the same kind of thing.
Along with a test suite which builds into it the assumptions you made (without being aware of them) while writing the main code. It's unavoidable.
It's probably also worth noting that I wasn't suggesting QA people write the tests, but other programmers. If you have two people writing two lumps of code, ideally they should write each other's test harnesses.
(I realise this isn't always practical. Hence the ideally.)
Well, it does seem a bit much to make comments like that, and then complain the MPAA are being unreasonable because "all we're asking for is the movies when we want them"...
Slashdot Mirror
You're twisted. I like you.
Thanks - you've just brought back the mentally scarring images of Vicky Pollard in a bikini. That's more of Matt Lucas than I *ever* wanted to see.
The fact he has an MD doesn't mean he automatically knows what he's talking about; take Airframe as an example.
Mm ... no, I actually know a lot more people that use SF rather than 'scifi'. Mind you, I'd never have parsed the headline as being to do with San Francisco, simply because it comes after science fiction in the list of things I associate with that abbreviation. :) Each to their own.
> What's wrong with da Vinci?
Apart from the fact it's unreadable, due to Dan Brown's utter incompetance as a writer?
Although, to be fair, it might be better than "Digital Fortress".
PA won't charge you for the printing - they just make sure you get ripped off in other ways. Your friend, unfortunately, picked a really bad place to get it printed. :/ Partly because most bookstores won't stock them (some won't even special order them, due to the antics of the authors), but also because from all accounts claiming "I've got a book published by PA" is actually a minus point.
To be honest, if you have the cash you'd be better off paying for a real freelance editor to go over it, real cover art, and a real printer. PA edit very badly (if at all), prefer you to supply the art, and do an extremely bad job of the printing.
Vanity press isn't related to on-demand - vanity press essentially just means you pay them for printing your book, rather than the way it should be. Most of them tend to be POD, though, because it's much cheaper for them.
Since in order to publish it, the volunteer who submitted it as "Travis Tea" would have had to sign a contract saying that they wrote it all. Which they didn't.
Besides, it kind of works better this way - PA get bad press, and whatever expense they might have spent on "reviewing" it (about 50 cents), and people get directed at a more honest "we'll take what you give us and print it" place (Lulu).
(PA don't charge you for the printing, though, so the other reply's not correct.)
You're correct that it's against the spirit of the GPL - but it's still the direction some companies are going in. "You can have the source, but you won't be able to run any modified code."
Of course, he could be making a fatal mistake by assuming it was a woman...
So you can find it whatever you want, but since they don't do it, you're kind of starting from the wrong place. ;-)
(As someone else has said, APIs do change - but they change for reasons other than "let's break all the binary drivers".)
If you find blogs annoying, the simple solution is don't read them.
Not that I'm defending her, particularly - since I don't know either side of the story - but it does occur to me that that kind of stuff is probably best done face to face, or at worst through email, rather than on a public journal. Otherwise people are going to get embarrassed and annoyed.
Want to have some fun on LJ? Try to disagree with someone on your friends list, and watch the hilarity ensue.
For normal people, disagreeing with friends is something that happens. It doesn't cause any particular problems.
Getting rid of GCHQ would make it much much easier to blow up Big Ben, if you were so inclined.
I think making the assumption that the terrorists aren't particularly educated is dangerous, but to answer your question, GCHQ is quite well known within Britain. Most people are aware of what it is and what it sod.es
The only thing that this'll be useful for, for me anyway, is installing software that companies release RPM-only, binary only that don't have Open Source alternatives.
That's what alien is for.
>Snail Mail is being outdated. There is no reason to play by mail anymore.
;-)
That's the same argument people have been giving for why books will die off, and that doesn't seem to be happening either.
From the comments here, it seems quite a few people here have only tried games like Diplomacy, chess etc. You're missing a whole other world of games which aren't chess. :-) Some of the hand-moderated games, in particular, have incredibly detailed worlds and plotlines. Ever wanted to be in a novel?
;-)
You might want to start here, with the PBM list. Or you could drop by the rec.games.pbm newsgroup for recommendations, chat etc. (Actually, do that anyway.) You might even consider looking at Flagship. There used to be a policy of sending a sample copy to interested folk, although I don't know if that policy still exists.
From games I've played, Lizards! is good fun; Madhouse run some good games, and have extremely good customer service. You've also got Middle Earth Games running various LoTR games.
Go on, have a stab. You too can get addicted.
Actually, some combination of tactics would be interesting. Keep it on an encrypted volume; if people take it away from you and start demanding keys, claim that you did "dd if=/dev/random of=/dev/hdb" which is why it looks random.
I suspect there are gaping holes in that, but there you go.
When I looked at student editions of a few programs (can't remember which ones, this was some years ago now), the deal was that when you stopped being a student you had to switch your licence to a "full" one.
You might want to double-check that yours don't say the same kind of thing.
That's the *only* bit that you find to question? :-)
Along with a test suite which builds into it the assumptions you made (without being aware of them) while writing the main code. It's unavoidable.
It's probably also worth noting that I wasn't suggesting QA people write the tests, but other programmers. If you have two people writing two lumps of code, ideally they should write each other's test harnesses.
(I realise this isn't always practical. Hence the ideally.)
Really, you want the tests written by people who *didn't* write the code.
Well, it does seem a bit much to make comments like that, and then complain the MPAA are being unreasonable because "all we're asking for is the movies when we want them"...
Try to think a bit ahead about what movies you wanna see next weekend and start the download a few days ahead.
Or just go to a video rental place and get it straight away...
Don't really see why it would be illegal to access your own webmail
Outlook can access Yahoo webmail? When did it start being able to do that...?