You cannot apply a license which grants to the licensee any rights which you do not possess. In Other (small) Words, the GPL CANNOT force Microsoft to release the source code for their libraries in this case because your application of the GPL to code which you do not own would be unenforceable. In fact, you might be held liable for damages...
but this implies that if I download the Microsoft SDK, develop some code against it, then release it under the GPL, or incorporate any GPL code, the GPL applies to the entire program,...
Nope, if you download the MS SDK and develop code against it, you CANNOT release it under the GPL. The GPL prohibits it. So why has MS got their knickers in a twist?
I don't know whether Microsoft's lawyers are this clueless, or if they're spreading FUD. If the latter, this is a new level of spin, even for them.
I gathered it was a district-by-district decision -- not a national one. We never dealt with the Canton office, so for all I know they're still using overflight. I guess if there's somebody up there who is willing to do it cheaply enough, the Canton office can afford it.
There's also the possibility that the satellite photos didn't work out as well as had been hoped, and the other offices have returned to using overflight in the intervening period...
My point being: real scientists need to jump in and help these poor folks because they really could use the help.I mean who's never heard the argument that goes something like "I know God exists 'cuz flowers are purty"?
Unfortunately, that's exactly the argument used by this author: "God must exist because humans are purtier than slugs." Every time I see this argument, I am blown away by the arrogance of it. Man exists, therefore God must. Surely Jehovah, or Allah, or Shiva, or Zeus or Odin would rain fire on any human haughty enough to make God's existence contingent on his own.
I used to do the aerial photography for the USDA in about half of New York State. Not a Piper, a Cessna. And plain old 35mm, not some bizarre large format thing. 10" negs? How would you handle that kind of monstrosity inside a small plane? Furthermore, we didn't use any Xs or Ls or otherwise. Didn't need em, actually. We drew a series of straight lines on a map and flew straight from one end to the other, at a fixed groundspeed and altitude. Using a standard 35mm camera with autowinder and databack, we shot one image every 30 seconds or so (it varied, depending on the altitude). The frames would overlap by about 20% on each side. It's dead simple to compute which frame of which roll belongs to any point on the ground. We did this exactly once a year, for the payment-in-kind program. In other words, the program which pays farmers to leave fields fallow. The USDA had a neat computer system that would take a couple of points on the frame, compensate for plane roll and yaw, and compute the area of the fields in question. Since this was in the Northeast, the fields aren't as large and regularly shaped as in the Midwest, and they're pretty tough to measure accurately on the ground without trained surveyors. This scheme was more accurate than the manual methods the USDA had previously used.
In addition to the area of the fields photographed, the USDA also needed to know what type of crops are being produced. They claimed that they could distinguish crop types from the films, so I imagine they could also identify pot.
The relevance here is that in about 1988 or 1989, that office of the USDA stopped hiring aerial photographers, and began getting all their data from satellite photos.
You'll have to run a transparent proxy on a different machine. But then, sure, you can probably hijack it. Unless they've done some kind of weird public-key thing in the BIOS, which is hard to believe.
I'm surprised that no one has already posted this.
Microsoft has placed very strict limits on what customizations vendors can do on systems before they ship. Microsoft wants Windows to control the horizontal and the vertical. Well, there's another player in town with a pretty large market share, and the tactical high-ground: Phoenix. The BIOS rules the machine, not Windows. I'm positive that this feature was requested by the systems vendors, and it's just a case of them fighting back against one of their suppliers who has gotten a bit too pushy.
I'm not sure I like the fines for speeding; but if they could have one for failure to use a turn signal, I'd be all for it!
When I took driver's ed, oh, a couple of decades ago now, I'm pretty sure they told us that you could be fined for failure to use a turn signal. I admit I was distracted by the hot blonde next to me, but I did pass, so I don't think I was hallucinating that part.
Open source apps do not install new versions of existing libraries, and libraries increment version numbers when they break compatibility.
then how come cdparanoia (or any of a dozen other applications) insists on a different version of libc.so.6 than the one I have installed? Silly me, in twenty years of Unix experience I had naively expected that "requires libc.so.6" meant just (and only) that.
If crappy cell phones cause plane crashes, somebody should tell the security guards to stop letting people carry them onboard. Before some depressed kid with a grduge lights up his dad's old Motorola on final approach.
they were not using standard gnutella ports, so I had to scan them to find it
A couple of scans doesn't make someone a burgler, IMO. But someone walking through the neighborhood systematically checking every house? Probably. I figure that if the only report the ISP gets is mine, there's nothing going on. But if they get thirty, that's smoke.
I report these. I'll tell you what, just because it's not illegal doesn't mean I have to like it. It's almost certainly someone up to no good -- even if the only thing they're probing is portmapper. If I were running an ISP, I'd want to know about suspicious activity by my subscribers, and I'd definitely keep an eye on them afterwards.
I report them, not because I'm frightened of them, but because it's easier than taking them down myself.
Since they're doing it from Korea, China, and Ghana, the fact that it might be illegal here doesn't help your security much.
Or, to put it another way, since you're going to have to secure your systems anyway, why bother trying to make something illegal that actually might have a useful purpose once in a while?
So, for cloning to be useful for us humans, given the likely near-term progress in both the cloning arena and the anti-aging arena, the most practical strategy for those interested in possibly cloning themselves or their loved ones or their loved ones' body parts in the future, would be to bank their genetic material NOW before the telomeres degrade any further.
Like any network, the utility is proportional to the number of users. And it's fairly non-linear.
So the best thing you can do, *now*, is to set up PGP and put your keys on the public keyservers. You don't ever have to send anything using it, but by being able to receive PGP-encrypted email, you have increased the value of the network.
A well-populated database of keys is a necessary precursor to widespread email encryption. The web-of-trust mechanism for certifying keys means that you don't need to trust the key repository. The existing keyservers work fine.
I wasn't beating anyone up over the indians. Just using them as a nearby example whose history and status I assumed (perhaps wrongly) would be familiar.
On the original note, the US does not have pre-existing non-agression treaties with, eg, Ghana. Or even someplace closer to home, like Mexico.
... If Microsoft wants to give Windows software to public schools at a cost blow the production cost and the transaction consummates a sale, the first sale doctrine would apply, and the school could resell the programs at a higher price to a corporation, retaining the difference. This would cause Microsoft to charge all customers one price, either by lowering its price, forcing it to run at a loss, or raising its price, thus making the program unavailable to schools and other meagerly funded organizations. This result is economically inefficient and would most assuredly be politically unpopular.
I think this is nonsense. If Microsoft, or anybody else, thinks that schools, churches or libraries are underfunded, and deserve to have cheap Microsoft applications, then those high-minded philanthropists can just as easily grant money directly to the socially-valuable institutions, or subsidize their purchases. If those institutions would rather have the money than the software -- if they think they know better how it could be used -- isn't that their decision to make? What justifies your paternal assumption that they need cheap software more than, for instance, cheap food?
Your argument is just a smokescreen for abusive licensing practices.
Research grants to universities, be they government grants or private grants, are not provided to purchase intellectual property. They are provided to advance the state of human knowledge. It's interesting that you cite the web, for instance. Was the web developed in the course of establishing a patent? Hell no! How about the web browsers? NO again. How about other internet applications: email, netnews, file transfer, file sharing protocols like NFS or AFS. Are these patented? No. no, non, nyet. And yet they were developed anyway. Curious, isn't it?
It is not at all clear that even a perfectimplementation of the patent model would generate innovation in software more fairly and rapidly than would be the case if there were no software patents at all. When you consider that the patent office is so badly broken as it is, well, throwing the baby out with the bathwater is justified if I can't get rid of this fetid bathwater any other way.
One way to help out those who are poor is by opening them up to the modern economy and make it as accessible as possible. One way to do this is by making sure they possess the knowledge and skills of the modern economy. One of those skills is the dominant language. If you want to be rich, you learn to act, speak, think, like the rich people. Preserving the "native language and culture" is the province of romantic idealists.
Don't go calling me a cultural imperialist, now. I actually read, speak, and write three languages, and could easily add a couple of more. I love the differentness of distant cultures. I am a "romantic pragmatist." I would love to see this differentness preserved, but I recognize that its passage is inevitable. The fact is that all these languages and cultures sprang up because the world was so vast. Groups of people were totally isolated from each other.
The "western" world isn't that large anymore -- it's actually smaller than it's ever been. When Alexander the Great ruled the world, it was months from one end to the other. Now, the western world is maybe a day from one end to the other. The natural circumstances under which those languages arose simply do not exist any longer. They are fish out of water, and they must naturally pass on -- it's just the way of things.
There may be room for many different languages when the human race colonizes the solar system, but I suspect that even then, the communications delays will be low enough that a single culture will be maintained, more or less.
I mean, imagine how much pooerer you would be if you had been unable to read the epic poems of early Anglo-Saxon culture in their original form! Or the early Judaic and Greek writings on which much of our more recent culture is based.
You *have* read Beowulf, and the Canterbury Tales, haven't you? Along with Plato's Republic in Greek, and the Dead Sea scrolls?
Now imagine how hard this would be if your computer didn't support the full character set in which they were written.
Re:wouldn't it be more practical to use power grid
on
Duct Tape
·
· Score: 2
You're still making electricity. I was thinking steam.
Slashdot Mirror
You cannot apply a license which grants to the licensee any rights which you do not possess. In Other (small) Words, the GPL CANNOT force Microsoft to release the source code for their libraries in this case because your application of the GPL to code which you do not own would be unenforceable. In fact, you might be held liable for damages...
but this implies that if I download the Microsoft SDK, develop some code against it, then release it under the GPL, or incorporate any GPL code, the GPL applies to the entire program,...
Nope, if you download the MS SDK and develop code against it, you CANNOT release it under the GPL. The GPL prohibits it. So why has MS got their knickers in a twist?
I don't know whether Microsoft's lawyers are this clueless, or if they're spreading FUD. If the latter, this is a new level of spin, even for them.
I gathered it was a district-by-district decision -- not a national one. We never dealt with the Canton office, so for all I know they're still using overflight. I guess if there's somebody up there who is willing to do it cheaply enough, the Canton office can afford it.
There's also the possibility that the satellite photos didn't work out as well as had been hoped, and the other offices have returned to using overflight in the intervening period...
My point being: real scientists need to jump in and help these poor folks because they really could use the help.I mean who's never heard the argument that goes something like "I know God exists 'cuz flowers are purty"?
Unfortunately, that's exactly the argument used by this author: "God must exist because humans are purtier than slugs." Every time I see this argument, I am blown away by the arrogance of it. Man exists, therefore God must. Surely Jehovah, or Allah, or Shiva, or Zeus or Odin would rain fire on any human haughty enough to make God's existence contingent on his own.
I used to do the aerial photography for the USDA in about half of New York State. Not a Piper, a Cessna. And plain old 35mm, not some bizarre large format thing. 10" negs? How would you handle that kind of monstrosity inside a small plane? Furthermore, we didn't use any Xs or Ls or otherwise. Didn't need em, actually. We drew a series of straight lines on a map and flew straight from one end to the other, at a fixed groundspeed and altitude. Using a standard 35mm camera with autowinder and databack, we shot one image every 30 seconds or so (it varied, depending on the altitude). The frames would overlap by about 20% on each side. It's dead simple to compute which frame of which roll belongs to any point on the ground. We did this exactly once a year, for the payment-in-kind program. In other words, the program which pays farmers to leave fields fallow. The USDA had a neat computer system that would take a couple of points on the frame, compensate for plane roll and yaw, and compute the area of the fields in question.
Since this was in the Northeast, the fields aren't as large and regularly shaped as in the Midwest, and they're pretty tough to measure accurately on the ground without trained surveyors. This scheme was more accurate than the manual methods the USDA had previously used.
In addition to the area of the fields photographed, the USDA also needed to know what type of crops are being produced. They claimed that they could distinguish crop types from the films, so I imagine they could also identify pot.
The relevance here is that in about 1988 or 1989, that office of the USDA stopped hiring aerial photographers, and began getting all their data from satellite photos.
You'll have to run a transparent proxy on a different machine. But then, sure, you can probably hijack it. Unless they've done some kind of weird public-key thing in the BIOS, which is hard to believe.
I'm surprised that no one has already posted this.
Microsoft has placed very strict limits on what customizations vendors can do on systems before they ship. Microsoft wants Windows to control the horizontal and the vertical. Well, there's another player in town with a pretty large market share, and the tactical high-ground: Phoenix. The BIOS rules the machine, not Windows. I'm positive that this feature was requested by the systems vendors, and it's just a case of them fighting back against one of their suppliers who has gotten a bit too pushy.
I'm not sure I like the fines for speeding; but if they could have one for failure to use a turn signal, I'd be all for it!
When I took driver's ed, oh, a couple of decades ago now, I'm pretty sure they told us that you could be fined for failure to use a turn signal. I admit I was distracted by the hot blonde next to me, but I did pass, so I don't think I was hallucinating that part.
How to Bribe a Governor & His Wife in the Futures Market
Open source apps do not install new versions of existing libraries, and libraries increment version numbers when they break compatibility.
then how come cdparanoia (or any of a dozen other applications) insists on a different version of libc.so.6 than the one I have installed? Silly me, in twenty years of Unix experience I had naively expected that "requires libc.so.6" meant just (and only) that.
If crappy cell phones cause plane crashes, somebody should tell the security guards to stop letting people carry them onboard. Before some depressed kid with a grduge lights up his dad's old Motorola on final approach.
If intentional radiators were really that dangerous, terrorists would use cellphones, not bombs.
The technical approach of talking to publicly accessible servers and attempting to fingerprint the OS is fraught with methodological problems.
The naive approach of asking hardware vendors how many units of hardware ship with what OS is obviously flawed.
So why not just do the dumb brute-force thing? Dial phone numbers at random and ask people what they use? Too expensive?
How much is accurate data worth, anyway?
they were not using standard gnutella ports, so I had to scan them to find it
A couple of scans doesn't make someone a burgler, IMO. But someone walking through the neighborhood systematically checking every house? Probably. I figure that if the only report the ISP gets is mine, there's nothing going on. But if they get thirty, that's smoke.
I report these. I'll tell you what, just because it's not illegal doesn't mean I have to like it. It's almost certainly someone up to no good -- even if the only thing they're probing is portmapper. If I were running an ISP, I'd want to know about suspicious activity by my subscribers, and I'd definitely keep an eye on them afterwards.
I report them, not because I'm frightened of them, but because it's easier than taking them down myself.
Since they're doing it from Korea, China, and Ghana, the fact that it might be illegal here doesn't help your security much.
Or, to put it another way, since you're going to have to secure your systems anyway, why bother trying to make something illegal that actually might have a useful purpose once in a while?
Oh, no no. That's not illegal, they're a major corporation that buys congressmen by the gross. It's only illegal if you do it.
So, for cloning to be useful for us humans, given the likely near-term progress in both the cloning arena and the anti-aging arena, the most practical strategy for those interested in possibly cloning themselves or their loved ones or their loved ones' body parts in the future, would be to bank their genetic material NOW before the telomeres degrade any further.
New business plan for Alcor?
Like any network, the utility is proportional to the number of users. And it's fairly non-linear.
So the best thing you can do, *now*, is to set up PGP and put your keys on the public keyservers. You don't ever have to send anything using it, but by being able to receive PGP-encrypted email, you have increased the value of the network.
A well-populated database of keys is a necessary precursor to widespread email encryption. The web-of-trust mechanism for certifying keys means that you don't need to trust the key repository. The existing keyservers work fine.
What, you mean like S/MIME?
It's already there in Outlook (and Outlook Express?)
I wasn't beating anyone up over the indians. Just using them as a nearby example whose history and status I assumed (perhaps wrongly) would be familiar.
On the original note, the US does not have pre-existing non-agression treaties with, eg, Ghana. Or even someplace closer to home, like Mexico.
... If Microsoft wants to give Windows software to public schools at a cost blow the production cost and the transaction consummates a sale, the first sale doctrine would apply, and the school could resell the programs at a higher price to a corporation, retaining the difference. This would cause Microsoft to charge all customers one price, either by lowering its price, forcing it to run at a loss, or raising its price, thus making the program unavailable to schools and other meagerly funded organizations. This result is economically inefficient and would most assuredly be politically unpopular.
I think this is nonsense. If Microsoft, or anybody else, thinks that schools, churches or libraries are underfunded, and deserve to have cheap Microsoft applications, then those high-minded philanthropists can just as easily grant money directly to the socially-valuable institutions, or subsidize their purchases. If those institutions would rather have the money than the software -- if they think they know better how it could be used -- isn't that their decision to make? What justifies your paternal assumption that they need cheap software more than, for instance, cheap food?
Your argument is just a smokescreen for abusive licensing practices.
Research grants to universities, be they government grants or private grants, are not provided to purchase intellectual property. They are provided to advance the state of human knowledge.
It's interesting that you cite the web, for instance. Was the web developed in the course of establishing a patent? Hell no! How about the web browsers? NO again. How about other internet applications: email, netnews, file transfer, file sharing protocols like NFS or AFS. Are these patented? No. no, non, nyet. And yet they were developed anyway. Curious, isn't it?
It is not at all clear that even a perfectimplementation of the patent model would generate innovation in software more fairly and rapidly than would be the case if there were no software patents at all. When you consider that the patent office is so badly broken as it is, well, throwing the baby out with the bathwater is justified if I can't get rid of this fetid bathwater any other way.
One way to help out those who are poor is by opening them up to the modern economy and make it as accessible as possible.
One way to do this is by making sure they possess the knowledge and skills of the modern economy. One of those skills is the dominant language. If you want to be rich, you learn to act, speak, think, like the rich people. Preserving the "native language and culture" is the province of romantic idealists.
Don't go calling me a cultural imperialist, now. I actually read, speak, and write three languages, and could easily add a couple of more. I love the differentness of distant cultures. I am a "romantic pragmatist." I would love to see this differentness preserved, but I recognize that its passage is inevitable. The fact is that all these languages and cultures sprang up because the world was so vast. Groups of people were totally isolated from each other.
The "western" world isn't that large anymore -- it's actually smaller than it's ever been. When Alexander the Great ruled the world, it was months from one end to the other. Now, the western world is maybe a day from one end to the other.
The natural circumstances under which those languages arose simply do not exist any longer. They are fish out of water, and they must naturally pass on -- it's just the way of things.
There may be room for many different languages when the human race colonizes the solar system, but I suspect that even then, the communications delays will be low enough that a single culture will be maintained, more or less.
I mean, imagine how much pooerer you would be if you had been unable to read the epic poems of early Anglo-Saxon culture in their original form! Or the early Judaic and Greek writings on which much of our more recent culture is based.
You *have* read Beowulf, and the Canterbury Tales, haven't you? Along with Plato's Republic in Greek, and the Dead Sea scrolls?
Now imagine how hard this would be if your computer didn't support the full character set in which they were written.
You're still making electricity. I was thinking steam.