Won't matter. Remember, Nixon had an independent commission study the issues surrounding marijuana (LaGuardia). They came back and recommended decriminalization. We're still fighting the war on drug users today. Right wingers are immune to science.
And once they can no longer deny it is caused by man, they will assert that it's not a bad thing at all (thus absolving deniers of any need to do anything). Global warming just means more rain in the tropics and temperate weather in Canada and Russia. How could that be bad?
How about this: what kind of person applies to life-threatening jobs where customers are almost never satisfied, regardless of how he performs?
The real customers of the police aren't who you think they are. And they're very satisfied with the performance they've gotten.
And what kind of conditions should be improved (or avoided degradation) on said jobs to attract "better" (or avoid attracting "worse") people?
Make the police serve the interests of the people instead of protecting the elites and you'll see a huge shift in public perception of police, as well as an influx of people who actually want to do good, instead of just power tripping.
Poorly managed and funded libraries will obviously be irrelevant. Well funded and managed libraries will never become irrelevant. The problem is that our country doesn't value education and sharing anymore. The decline of our library system tells us nothing about libraries, but it speaks volumes about our country.
You can do anything with the GPL as long as you include sources. If you disagree with this, you don't have to contribute to it.
They both include one restriction. Which restriction is least restrictive?
One guarantees that all users will be able to fix and modify their software if there are problems. The other offeres no guarantees. In terms of enabling people to do things, which is what freedom is all about, the GPL is clearly more free. BSD only enables you to remove the freedom of others.
That's a piss poor excuse. Just run an open git repository and you'll never be bothered with packaging and releasing code again. Also, if people have the source they can help fix the issues that seem to be slowing them down.
They can slap whatever license they want on it, and make whatever promises they want. The fact remains that if a binary is available, and corresponding sources are not, it is closed source. It might be open source again, maybe even soon, but it's not open source today.
In some areas of France, being a cop is all the reason you need for being assaulted
The solution to that is to earn a reputation for integrity. Not to go into hiding. If the people are so upset with government that cops are arbitrarily targeted, that's a symptom of a problem far deeper than a website distributing public information. A police force that is held in such extreme contempt by the people deserves to wither and die.
But that is their day job, when they take off the uniform and go home I think they should have the same protections as everyone else.
I agree. Except that the "same protections" should be none. I use mice for research in my work. If PETA wants to come set up camp on my sidewalk and protest, that's their right. If protestors want to follow a cop home and protest there, that's their right too.
I'm all for making police actions more transparent, but single police officers should have some privacy regarding their personal life too.
Why? If you're afraid of the consequences if your neighbors find out what you do, maybe you should be doing something else. If the public is so outraged at cops, maybe they should fix their behavior instead of going into hiding.
Current Sci-Fi hasn't been around long enough for it to be influential. It's also not been around long enough for the crap to be forgotten by history. For a neophyte if they pick something new off the shelf it's likely to be crap. If it's not crap, it's likely to borrow heavily from the classics. If it's completely novel (no pun intended), they won't have any context in which to appreciate that. In all these cases the reader benefits from being introduced to the classics first.
Notice that nothing about this argument is Sci-Fi specific. It applies to all cultural works.
Slashdot Mirror
Won't matter. Remember, Nixon had an independent commission study the issues surrounding marijuana (LaGuardia). They came back and recommended decriminalization. We're still fighting the war on drug users today. Right wingers are immune to science.
And once they can no longer deny it is caused by man, they will assert that it's not a bad thing at all (thus absolving deniers of any need to do anything). Global warming just means more rain in the tropics and temperate weather in Canada and Russia. How could that be bad?
Have you ever used Windows 95? When you install software it leaves icons on a grid on the desktop.
Two faced? Not really, I just have less to do today. I've been unfairly critical of Google too.
Asshole? It's a fair cop.
GPL lets you remove the freedom of developers.
Nonsense. GPL empowers developers. Who else uses source code but developers?
How about this: what kind of person applies to life-threatening jobs where customers are almost never satisfied, regardless of how he performs?
The real customers of the police aren't who you think they are. And they're very satisfied with the performance they've gotten.
And what kind of conditions should be improved (or avoided degradation) on said jobs to attract "better" (or avoid attracting "worse") people?
Make the police serve the interests of the people instead of protecting the elites and you'll see a huge shift in public perception of police, as well as an influx of people who actually want to do good, instead of just power tripping.
Using the term "fundamental software freedoms" is even worse and likely means something different to each person who hears/reads it.
Software freedoms are defined here.
The two licenses serve different purposes and as such, one is not better then the other
Yes, one serves to protect your freedom while the other does not.
How does stupidity adequately explain the banning of the developer who ported 1.2 to Lion?
Poorly managed and funded libraries will obviously be irrelevant. Well funded and managed libraries will never become irrelevant. The problem is that our country doesn't value education and sharing anymore. The decline of our library system tells us nothing about libraries, but it speaks volumes about our country.
No, it applies quite well to Android. Android is no longer open source.
Present me with a government worth defending, and I will gladly join up.
You can do anything with the GPL as long as you include sources. If you disagree with this, you don't have to contribute to it.
They both include one restriction. Which restriction is least restrictive?
One guarantees that all users will be able to fix and modify their software if there are problems. The other offeres no guarantees. In terms of enabling people to do things, which is what freedom is all about, the GPL is clearly more free. BSD only enables you to remove the freedom of others.
A promise to release source is not source. The developer of the fork has been banned from the groups. So the article seems pretty accurate.
What do we call the opposite of FUD? Complacency and Certitude? CaC? Quit trying to shove all this CaC down our throats!
That's a piss poor excuse. Just run an open git repository and you'll never be bothered with packaging and releasing code again. Also, if people have the source they can help fix the issues that seem to be slowing them down.
They can slap whatever license they want on it, and make whatever promises they want. The fact remains that if a binary is available, and corresponding sources are not, it is closed source. It might be open source again, maybe even soon, but it's not open source today.
Except include code with licenses that guarantee the users fundamental software freedoms.
No, that's Bob Weir's search engine.
Porn is good, but copyright is bad.
A government without that much power will be insufficient to stave off warlords.
Yeah, they replace violent gang leaders with gang leaders backed by government violence and we're back in the corporate facist state we started with.
In some areas of France, being a cop is all the reason you need for being assaulted
The solution to that is to earn a reputation for integrity. Not to go into hiding. If the people are so upset with government that cops are arbitrarily targeted, that's a symptom of a problem far deeper than a website distributing public information. A police force that is held in such extreme contempt by the people deserves to wither and die.
But that is their day job, when they take off the uniform and go home I think they should have the same protections as everyone else.
I agree. Except that the "same protections" should be none. I use mice for research in my work. If PETA wants to come set up camp on my sidewalk and protest, that's their right. If protestors want to follow a cop home and protest there, that's their right too.
I'm all for making police actions more transparent, but single police officers should have some privacy regarding their personal life too.
Why? If you're afraid of the consequences if your neighbors find out what you do, maybe you should be doing something else. If the public is so outraged at cops, maybe they should fix their behavior instead of going into hiding.
Andrew Jackson.
The difference is that out military budget is mostly wasted
That's the part we cut.
Current Sci-Fi hasn't been around long enough for it to be influential. It's also not been around long enough for the crap to be forgotten by history. For a neophyte if they pick something new off the shelf it's likely to be crap. If it's not crap, it's likely to borrow heavily from the classics. If it's completely novel (no pun intended), they won't have any context in which to appreciate that. In all these cases the reader benefits from being introduced to the classics first.
Notice that nothing about this argument is Sci-Fi specific. It applies to all cultural works.