Not necessarily. The terms of the initial contract may require that it not be sold/exported to nations on a certain list, and that any party you sell it to also agree to these terms. In other words the terms of the contract may be required to transfer with the goods.
RMS gets a lot of mockery for this, but for all the eccentricity, it reveals him as a man who thinks really hard about what he does, and making sure it fits his moral code. How many of us would avoid long-distance trains, or ask conference organisers to use pseudonyms for hotel rooms, because we were so stubbornly committed to the idea of privacy? I'm too much of a pragmatist to put up with that sort of nonsense but I admire the integrity on display.
I'm sorry but all this sounds more like a benign psychological disorder than some sort of moral code. Perhaps a little mania exists in many uncompromising crusaders.
Puny prize. Especially if they are DARPA's dumpsters.
I'd expect that DARPA has incinerators. Documents --> office shredder --> building incinerator --> dumpster. If someone can reconstruct documents from a bag of ash then I agree, the prize should be much much larger.:-)
Technically the original iPhone got 3 years not 2.5. The clock doesn't stop when 3.1.3 was released. It stops when 4.0 was released, the first incompatible update. So the chart does seem accurate, at least for this device. I didn't look up any others.
Were they profitable subscribers? Or subscribers who were "overusing" the system from the perspective of Netflix's expected usage patterns? I'm not suggesting these customers did anything wrong, Netflix may very well have had naive models and expectations.
I've had friends with various small businesses and they all learned rather quickly to tell some potential customers: I am sorry but I don't think we will be able to help you. You can make a profit, or you can meet everyone's needs, but you probably can't do both.
I suspect available bandwidth to homes and the licensing of content are probably greater barriers than the credit worthiness of the government. Any problems with the former?
"PayPal turned off donations". It sounds as if the foundation aggregated $1.2M worth of small web based donations before being "turned off". Once "turned off" they could have written a check and a new organization could have taken over. PayPal is most likely being reactive not proactive so Wikileaks, or their friends, could have constructed a series of proxies. These fundraising efforts were after all a violation of corporate policy and not any law?
And you might want to reconsider as well. Lehrer wrote that when Von Braun was NASA's chief designer. It was a joke about how VB used to do the V2, and now he was working for NASA designing moon rockets.
I think Occam's razor would suggest that Wikileaks was financially mismanaged (as in things like the above not embezzlement) or that the Wikileaks organization has been discredited and the donations don't exist at the required level. Blaming a lack of credit card processing seems a little bit like the wall street CEOs blaming the weather. Maybe is was really how the organization was managed?
Occam's razor doesn't mean simplifying things to such a ludicrous level of dichotomies. Yes, mismanagement must be considered, and bad publicity too would have an impact. It's asinine though, as you did in your analogy, to dismiss the loss of credit card processing as being a trivial thing. Raising funds online isn't terribly easy, even with a fairly well engaged community. Credit card processing allows for a nice and quick donation. Relying on people to mail cheques is nowhere near as reliable as catching people with a "donate now" button on the website. There are workarounds, none of which comes close to replacing the loss of the drive-by donations they'd have received. This is demonstrably a pretty serious loss - not something to which one would say "Oh well" before switching to a workaround that'll be anywhere near as effective.
I think you overestimate the issue. For example consider the ease at which various U.S. based groups collected money on behalf of tsunami relief and then delivered the proceeds to the Red Cross of Japan. Web surfers could click on a "donate now" button that went to a local organization and that organization could eventually write a single check. Again, it seems more of an issue of organization and management.
You might reconsider who is having the woosh moment. That satirist who penned the original was essentially making the same point as I.:-) Out of context the original intent is easily missed.
You run the simulation through a CFD package, compare the prediction with reality, and tweak the parameters for the upper atmosphere accordingly. Keep crashing satellites until you consistently get good results. Problem solved.
There is solar "weather" in space that can affect an orbit. There is weather and turbulence in the upper atmosphere. It is not a static environment where we can refine our parameters for greater accuracy.
Unfortunately, paper checks don't travel well outside the country. This is because they generally clear through the nation's central bank. International wire transfers are expensive and troublesome, so much so that 99% of potential donors will change their minds about donating.
Again, independent groups seem to have no problem collecting donations for a cause and donating these funds as a single aggregate sum. Wire transfer expenses are inconsequential in such cases. Think of a U.S. on-campus group that collected for tsunami relief and then sent what they raised to the Red Cross of Japan.
I can't help but wonder if the current situation is a result of fund raising naivety or if the credit card processing issue was seen as a publicity/marketing tool. In the later case perhaps there was an expectation of big checks from celebrities or lots of local proxy organizations doing fund raising.
The solution to all of this is very simple, but sadly the general population, and many of the journalists who are paid to corral their thoughts, is even more simple. If half of all the people who follow the Wikileaks account adopted Bitcoin...
Technology is not always the answer. A far simpler solution is to mail a paper check, either as an individual or a group that raised money (possibly aggregating online donations) for a cause.
Since all the major credit card companies are based in the United States, they are free to push their national interests through financial attacks.
However this seems an inconvenience, not a death sentence for a political organization. People could send paper checks. Some other group could aggregate online donations and deliver a paper check. Independent groups raise money for a cause and then donate to organizations supporting that cause all the time.
I think Occam's razor would suggest that Wikileaks was financially mismanaged (as in things like the above not embezzlement) or that the Wikileaks organization has been discredited and the donations don't exist at the required level. Blaming a lack of credit card processing seems a little bit like the wall street CEOs blaming the weather. Maybe is was really how the organization was managed?
No problem. I understand how the dark side changes as the sun, earth and moon change their relative positions; as exhibited by the observable phases of the moon. I'm just being loose in the terminology to accommodate a wide spectrum of readers. Yeah, I'm guilty of perpetuating their confusion.
Isn't there some form of restriction here in the license, are they allowed to make a closed source derivative work, seeing as they're the original authors?
Nope, it's BSD licensed. They can do whatever the hell they want.
As the owner of the copyright they are free to relicense their code however they want, GPL or BSD does not matter in such a case. GPL'd code is sometimes dual licensed in such a manner to make an active project acceptable to commercial users.
Actually its $800 in hardware (mini + touch) and that is regular retail prices.
At that point, you have a Mac mini, an iPod touch, the iOS simulator, and no way to load your app onto the device to test it. That requires an iOS Developer Program certificate, which costs $99 and will stop working at the end of one year.
Yes, thats why I mentioned $99 a year to publish in the first post and specifically pointed out that the $800 was in reference to hardware in the second post.
Plan on renewals for years 2, 3, and 4, and we're close to the $1250 mark that I quoted. Do students get a discount on certificates too?
And now factor in that the students can sell their apps. Something that was *far* more difficult to do in the not so distant pass. Apple also lowered the barrier to reaching a large consumer market.
Colonies were motivated by the rich natural resources just waiting to be exploited in the New World. Traveling to a planet or moon in our solar system, we can be quite certain that we have to bring everything necessary for survival with us.
That's not true. For example if the suspected water in deep craters on the moon is a reality we have a source of water, oxygen and fuel. The moon is a sponge for the He3 coming off the sun, that could be a natural resource the "old world" would be very interested in. Even if there were no resources on the moon astronauts could travel much lighter than Columbus, needing far fewer resources. Columbus didn't do much recycling, astronauts would recycle much of their "waste". Neither was Columbus interested in growing his own food, astronauts would likely do so in any long term setting.
What the advocates of human space flight don't get is that if space travel ever becomes a significant human activity, the infrastructure will bear no resemblance to anything we have today. The massive human ground support activity will have to be eliminated, with 99.99% of the work completely automated.
No. The problem today is that we are lifting everything from the surface of the earth. Its not automation that will significantly reduce the costs, its using "local" resources. Moon, steroids, etc.
That said, what roadblocks to develop for iOS? A Mac, a device and $99 a year to publish on the app store? To be honest that is an extremely low barrier to entry.
For students who have trouble paying for college, 1250 USD (Mac + iPT + certificate) is a lot of money.
Actually its $800 in hardware (mini + touch) and that is regular retail prices. Students are able to get significant discounts.
Slashdot Mirror
And it's all perfectly legal.
Not necessarily. The terms of the initial contract may require that it not be sold/exported to nations on a certain list, and that any party you sell it to also agree to these terms. In other words the terms of the contract may be required to transfer with the goods.
RMS gets a lot of mockery for this, but for all the eccentricity, it reveals him as a man who thinks really hard about what he does, and making sure it fits his moral code. How many of us would avoid long-distance trains, or ask conference organisers to use pseudonyms for hotel rooms, because we were so stubbornly committed to the idea of privacy? I'm too much of a pragmatist to put up with that sort of nonsense but I admire the integrity on display.
I'm sorry but all this sounds more like a benign psychological disorder than some sort of moral code. Perhaps a little mania exists in many uncompromising crusaders.
Puny prize. Especially if they are DARPA's dumpsters.
I'd expect that DARPA has incinerators. Documents --> office shredder --> building incinerator --> dumpster. If someone can reconstruct documents from a bag of ash then I agree, the prize should be much much larger. :-)
Technically the original iPhone got 3 years not 2.5. The clock doesn't stop when 3.1.3 was released. It stops when 4.0 was released, the first incompatible update. So the chart does seem accurate, at least for this device. I didn't look up any others.
hackers never actually misused their control over them in any way
So they are at an early testing stage. That is not overly reassuring.
Netflix lost 800,000 subscribers.
Were they profitable subscribers? Or subscribers who were "overusing" the system from the perspective of Netflix's expected usage patterns? I'm not suggesting these customers did anything wrong, Netflix may very well have had naive models and expectations.
I've had friends with various small businesses and they all learned rather quickly to tell some potential customers: I am sorry but I don't think we will be able to help you. You can make a profit, or you can meet everyone's needs, but you probably can't do both.
I suspect available bandwidth to homes and the licensing of content are probably greater barriers than the credit worthiness of the government. Any problems with the former?
Here you go.
"PayPal turned off donations". It sounds as if the foundation aggregated $1.2M worth of small web based donations before being "turned off". Once "turned off" they could have written a check and a new organization could have taken over. PayPal is most likely being reactive not proactive so Wikileaks, or their friends, could have constructed a series of proxies. These fundraising efforts were after all a violation of corporate policy and not any law?
Perhaps an elevated reinforced concrete platform is sufficient, 5m? Keep it simple?
Web surfers could click on a "donate now" button that went to a local organization and that organization could eventually write a single check.
Wikileaks had systems like that, the US government just shut down payments to the organizations that were accepting money for Wikileaks.
Citation?
And you might want to reconsider as well. Lehrer wrote that when Von Braun was NASA's chief designer. It was a joke about how VB used to do the V2, and now he was working for NASA designing moon rockets.
Yes, I was aware of all that. :-)
I think Occam's razor would suggest that Wikileaks was financially mismanaged (as in things like the above not embezzlement) or that the Wikileaks organization has been discredited and the donations don't exist at the required level. Blaming a lack of credit card processing seems a little bit like the wall street CEOs blaming the weather. Maybe is was really how the organization was managed?
Occam's razor doesn't mean simplifying things to such a ludicrous level of dichotomies. Yes, mismanagement must be considered, and bad publicity too would have an impact. It's asinine though, as you did in your analogy, to dismiss the loss of credit card processing as being a trivial thing. Raising funds online isn't terribly easy, even with a fairly well engaged community. Credit card processing allows for a nice and quick donation. Relying on people to mail cheques is nowhere near as reliable as catching people with a "donate now" button on the website. There are workarounds, none of which comes close to replacing the loss of the drive-by donations they'd have received. This is demonstrably a pretty serious loss - not something to which one would say "Oh well" before switching to a workaround that'll be anywhere near as effective.
I think you overestimate the issue. For example consider the ease at which various U.S. based groups collected money on behalf of tsunami relief and then delivered the proceeds to the Red Cross of Japan. Web surfers could click on a "donate now" button that went to a local organization and that organization could eventually write a single check. Again, it seems more of an issue of organization and management.
You might reconsider who is having the woosh moment. That satirist who penned the original was essentially making the same point as I. :-) Out of context the original intent is easily missed.
You run the simulation through a CFD package, compare the prediction with reality, and tweak the parameters for the upper atmosphere accordingly. Keep crashing satellites until you consistently get good results. Problem solved.
There is solar "weather" in space that can affect an orbit. There is weather and turbulence in the upper atmosphere. It is not a static environment where we can refine our parameters for greater accuracy.
Vunce ze rockets are up, who cares vhere zey come down?
My understanding of history is that the famous rockets scientists implied by your accent were very much concerned with where the rockets came down.
Unfortunately, paper checks don't travel well outside the country. This is because they generally clear through the nation's central bank. International wire transfers are expensive and troublesome, so much so that 99% of potential donors will change their minds about donating.
Again, independent groups seem to have no problem collecting donations for a cause and donating these funds as a single aggregate sum. Wire transfer expenses are inconsequential in such cases. Think of a U.S. on-campus group that collected for tsunami relief and then sent what they raised to the Red Cross of Japan.
I can't help but wonder if the current situation is a result of fund raising naivety or if the credit card processing issue was seen as a publicity/marketing tool. In the later case perhaps there was an expectation of big checks from celebrities or lots of local proxy organizations doing fund raising.
I for one am holding out for 3.11. I heard it will be for Workgroups!
It also has wonderful improvements to video compression, I hear.
Will it have more vibrant colors like the Intel CPUs?
The solution to all of this is very simple, but sadly the general population, and many of the journalists who are paid to corral their thoughts, is even more simple. If half of all the people who follow the Wikileaks account adopted Bitcoin ...
Technology is not always the answer. A far simpler solution is to mail a paper check, either as an individual or a group that raised money (possibly aggregating online donations) for a cause.
Since all the major credit card companies are based in the United States, they are free to push their national interests through financial attacks.
However this seems an inconvenience, not a death sentence for a political organization. People could send paper checks. Some other group could aggregate online donations and deliver a paper check. Independent groups raise money for a cause and then donate to organizations supporting that cause all the time.
I think Occam's razor would suggest that Wikileaks was financially mismanaged (as in things like the above not embezzlement) or that the Wikileaks organization has been discredited and the donations don't exist at the required level. Blaming a lack of credit card processing seems a little bit like the wall street CEOs blaming the weather. Maybe is was really how the organization was managed?
No problem. I understand how the dark side changes as the sun, earth and moon change their relative positions; as exhibited by the observable phases of the moon. I'm just being loose in the terminology to accommodate a wide spectrum of readers. Yeah, I'm guilty of perpetuating their confusion.
Isn't there some form of restriction here in the license, are they allowed to make a closed source derivative work, seeing as they're the original authors?
Nope, it's BSD licensed. They can do whatever the hell they want.
As the owner of the copyright they are free to relicense their code however they want, GPL or BSD does not matter in such a case. GPL'd code is sometimes dual licensed in such a manner to make an active project acceptable to commercial users.
Actually its $800 in hardware (mini + touch) and that is regular retail prices.
At that point, you have a Mac mini, an iPod touch, the iOS simulator, and no way to load your app onto the device to test it. That requires an iOS Developer Program certificate, which costs $99 and will stop working at the end of one year.
Yes, thats why I mentioned $99 a year to publish in the first post and specifically pointed out that the $800 was in reference to hardware in the second post.
Plan on renewals for years 2, 3, and 4, and we're close to the $1250 mark that I quoted. Do students get a discount on certificates too?
And now factor in that the students can sell their apps. Something that was *far* more difficult to do in the not so distant pass. Apple also lowered the barrier to reaching a large consumer market.
Colonies were motivated by the rich natural resources just waiting to be exploited in the New World. Traveling to a planet or moon in our solar system, we can be quite certain that we have to bring everything necessary for survival with us.
That's not true. For example if the suspected water in deep craters on the moon is a reality we have a source of water, oxygen and fuel. The moon is a sponge for the He3 coming off the sun, that could be a natural resource the "old world" would be very interested in. Even if there were no resources on the moon astronauts could travel much lighter than Columbus, needing far fewer resources. Columbus didn't do much recycling, astronauts would recycle much of their "waste". Neither was Columbus interested in growing his own food, astronauts would likely do so in any long term setting.
What the advocates of human space flight don't get is that if space travel ever becomes a significant human activity, the infrastructure will bear no resemblance to anything we have today. The massive human ground support activity will have to be eliminated, with 99.99% of the work completely automated.
No. The problem today is that we are lifting everything from the surface of the earth. Its not automation that will significantly reduce the costs, its using "local" resources. Moon, steroids, etc.
That said, what roadblocks to develop for iOS? A Mac, a device and $99 a year to publish on the app store? To be honest that is an extremely low barrier to entry.
For students who have trouble paying for college, 1250 USD (Mac + iPT + certificate) is a lot of money.
Actually its $800 in hardware (mini + touch) and that is regular retail prices. Students are able to get significant discounts.