Back in the day (from my recollection) SUSE would develop X drivers and then release them to others with a delay. They were indeed at the forefront of X drivers for a while, and it was because of effort they did.
This may help
Each version is given a distinguishing version number. If the Program specifies that a certain numbered version of the GNU General Public License "or any later version" applies to it, you have the option of following the terms and conditions either of that numbered version or of any later version published by the Free Software Foundation. If the Program does not specify a version number of the GNU General Public License, you may choose any version ever published by the Free Software Foundation. Emphasis mine
That's different though. The cable company pays essentially the same amount no matter how many channels you have. The internet they can actually save (by delaying capitol improvements) if they lose the bandwidth hogs. if they can lose the 5% of people using 20 times average (or whatever the math is) and charge the remaining people 30% less it could be more profitable.
I don't know the numbers of course, and the distribution of usage may be to even to allow kicking a few percent of users to have such a dramatic impact, but it would not surprise me if it were so.
I think the real problem is that with many inventions the sum can be greater than the parts. he AIDS cocktail is a great example of this.
If it were not for the fact it was a life saving treatment, agreement could probably never be reached.
I think the patent examiners should be evaluated by how many patents they reject, and then get a negative if in later appeal a rejections holds as the wrong choice.
The default state for copying someone else's' work is illegal. The EULA is what makes it legal (theoretically, and copies to RAM are excluded as needing it). The statement that it is impossible to install in compliance is false (from the article), since boot camp allows the installation of Windows on Apple hardware.
The copy from compressed file to HD is not by default legal, so an asshole lawyer could at least cost someone a lot of money (I do tend to agree that it is a ridiculous clause, and since it is being pushed by Apple itself probably would not hold up, but tell that to someone who posts a bad review and Apple decides to silence for example).
On a much smaller scale, but I was specifically thinking about the building of interstates between Wilmington, DE and Philadelphia, PA.
The route that went through the poor, primarily black areas (I95) had very little need for justification at all. The area that went through the richer white areas (I476 "The blue route") were bogged down ffor decades.
I grant that the complete destruction of the poor black neighborhoods happened long enough ago that it does not really count as "today" by any measure, but it is what I was thinking of.
The Atlanta olympics would be a much better point of comparison, but I am not from there and am too lazy to check how it went.
People are having software that they have no license to use being automatically installed on their systems. I would think a term like that is not valid (non-obvious terms may not be valid in the US), but if it does hold, they will have millions of people in the US infringing on their IP. If they decide they are desperate and start suing (not likely any time soon) there are a lot of potential targets.
This is like the RIAA giving away MP3s on their website, saying "you agree to listen to this on only RIAA approved devices". When you suddenly have millions of people acting innocently illegally using your product it is not good for them.
Clearly I am simply a US centric asshole American then.
I would be surprised, but not skeptic if there are no T1s or equivalent in Canada, Australia, or wherever it is with provinces and worse broadband than us in the US. Where I work we pay close to twice the number in the link, it downloads at a quarter the speed of my home cable (but uploads triple) and includes 12 phone lines. We also get real uptime guarantees. Still, it is a lot of money for not much speed.
If you are speaking as an end user I recommend you read your contract and stop acting like it does not allow for shenanigans.
They are usually VERY clear that you are paying for up to a certain number of tubes, and they will arbitrarily take away your maximum number of tubes if they decide you use them too much.
I'm not saying it's right, just that it is a little dis-ingenuous to pretend you didn't sign something that says I'll bend over and beg you for more.
If you really want your tube (and it is only one max all the time) all for yourself with no one else interfering and up all the time, it is available (that's a low price too).
I do agree that it would be nice (and probably should even be required in exchange for the monopoly) if providers had true unlimited, or even limited with the limits spelled out access, but I doubt anyone running into trouble with the current system would like the rates they see.
It's been working fairly well for me (I have been using since way too long ago, and must in the future remember to at least wait for Beta).
I have had very few audio problems.
I did have Amarock stop making sound at one point, and had to configure it to use pulsaudio (by default I think it was auto-detecting?)
Currently (noticed last night) vlc is making no noise, and I have been using Movie Player (Xine) instead. I would guess it is a similar problem.
Audio does seem more prone to skipping than it should (but I have no comparison, and it reall just be my hitting the disk really hard causing it).
The most useful thing in the new version for me has been.docx support. The compositing gnome window manager is nice though, and the new way it displays copying files is fantastic. Shelf in Compiz is really great too, and one of the few flashy things I find useful.
There was recently a problem with updates that caused an un-bootable system, which I don't hold against them, and I still updated another computer to 8.04 after it (a week ago), but it is a fair waring about using pre-release software.
hiding your fake key is like using 1111111111111 as your WEP key (ASCII 128 bit)
a DHCP response is much closer to broadcasting come on into my house, it's unlocked, and the interesting stuff (gateway) in the kitchen. I would think if I had a low power FM transmitter broadcasting something to that effect and people came into my house they would have every right. In fact like the FM transmitter it is a type of essage that is not human readable, and needs special machinery to interperet.
The analogy between a locked house with a hidden key and an unsecured wireless network responding DHCP requests would be terrible even for bad analogy guy.
I will accept that if someone's SSID specifically says not to use it there is a case, but without any evidence to the contrary signals coming into my property (either my car in public space or my house) inviting me to use their transmitter/receiver to access the internet (providing a gateway) any sane person would say that it is permission to use them.
If you ask for permission (DHCP Request) and the equipment says (to paraphrase) "absolutley, come on 0:0c:fa:a8:gc:bb hear is where I keep the gateway to the internet, I will make sure to send you data that comes for you, and direct any data you send to the correct place.", than absolutely the have permission.
If you have to monkey around setting up static addressing, or finding keys or what not, than it enters a gray area.
I imagine it will be like Office XP to Office 2007.
In other words, if you know how to use the program not too big a deal after a few hours using it. The built in help will get you most of the way, along with a little bit of searching for words you recognize.
The real problem is with the people that use it like a robot and don't really know how to use the program at all.
Aren't they talking about way bigger numbers than that?
2 Linux Distros (9GB) Firefox (negligible) Spybot (negligible)
times 3 to keep your ratio (1 down 2 up)
The trouble is people doing WAY more than that.
I would recomend people running into trouble to pay a little money and get Usenet access. I pay $24 for a 100GB block of download (no time limit). This is about 100 hours + of good quality video (somewhere between DVD and HDTV). I usually get 500KB/s download (though sometimes it is down aroun 200).
For recent stuff it is easier to find a good NZB than a good torrent, and bandwidth usage is WAY lower (even when taking into account that checksumming overhead of PAR files).
Every now and again torrents are useful for older things, but most stuff is just way more convenient to get from the news servers.
I don't think Social Security should be about saving for retirement.
It should be about sharing the risk of exceptional longevity, so we don't have old people starving to death. It really should only kick in at some point past expected life expectancy.
The fact that you don't put enough into your 401K means you are living beyond your means, and is the type of behavior that caused a need for social security to begin with (in the early part of the century "beyond your means" was much more likely to mean 3 meals a day though).
I'd say that an obligation to parent responsibly should have superseded the need for "decency timeslots" from square one. Just my opinion...
As you use a logging system in a DVR. Parents can't watch their children constantly, and there is stuff I wouldn't want my children to see at the very least (or the neighbors honestly, but I will defer to them on that). Nothing so bad on broadcast TV or even cable, this would be a brief example fromt he top of my head of 15 minutes that should not be viewed by children.
On "socialism security", you're absolutely right. It will be dead and gone by the time any non-baby boomer reaches eligibility ( esp. once they raise the eligibility age to the high 80's to stave off collapse ).
God forbid the program return to where it started (and should have remained). When Social Security was started it was for people past the average life expectancy. It should be re-adjusted to better reflect that, and God willing before the Baby Boomers bankrupt it. If one were to look at long term trends though, it makes more sense to punish the younger generation to get things into a sustainable check (each generation pays for itself), rather than the old (economically the younger generation is almost always better off than the older).
I mean what will we ever do if some extended powers expire, and the telecoms don't get immunity.
The thing about this bill is that it is shit. If the house keeps on with leaving immunity out (twice so far), and the president won't accept it without immunity, we win double. This bills failure to pass is a win for the American people (and its passing is a win for the terrorists, whom will have succeeded in making our country more like theirs).
Slashdot Mirror
Back in the day (from my recollection) SUSE would develop X drivers and then release them to others with a delay. They were indeed at the forefront of X drivers for a while, and it was because of effort they did.
Is that really the case?
I always thought the media companies force the cable company to take lots of channels, because that is more advertising.
FX wants to be on every cable network, the cable companies probably only care about 10-20 or so channels, and all the rest is replaceable filler.
I would especially think that in niche markets the channels would pay for exclusive deals.
Cable channels are a limited and valuable resource to content producers, if the cable companies are paying for them they are doing something wrong.
That's different though. The cable company pays essentially the same amount no matter how many channels you have. The internet they can actually save (by delaying capitol improvements) if they lose the bandwidth hogs. if they can lose the 5% of people using 20 times average (or whatever the math is) and charge the remaining people 30% less it could be more profitable.
I don't know the numbers of course, and the distribution of usage may be to even to allow kicking a few percent of users to have such a dramatic impact, but it would not surprise me if it were so.
I think the real problem is that with many inventions the sum can be greater than the parts. he AIDS cocktail is a great example of this.
If it were not for the fact it was a life saving treatment, agreement could probably never be reached.
I think the patent examiners should be evaluated by how many patents they reject, and then get a negative if in later appeal a rejections holds as the wrong choice.
The default state for copying someone else's' work is illegal. The EULA is what makes it legal (theoretically, and copies to RAM are excluded as needing it). The statement that it is impossible to install in compliance is false (from the article), since boot camp allows the installation of Windows on Apple hardware.
The copy from compressed file to HD is not by default legal, so an asshole lawyer could at least cost someone a lot of money (I do tend to agree that it is a ridiculous clause, and since it is being pushed by Apple itself probably would not hold up, but tell that to someone who posts a bad review and Apple decides to silence for example).
On a much smaller scale, but I was specifically thinking about the building of interstates between Wilmington, DE and Philadelphia, PA.
The route that went through the poor, primarily black areas (I95) had very little need for justification at all. The area that went through the richer white areas (I476 "The blue route") were bogged down ffor decades.
I grant that the complete destruction of the poor black neighborhoods happened long enough ago that it does not really count as "today" by any measure, but it is what I was thinking of.
The Atlanta olympics would be a much better point of comparison, but I am not from there and am too lazy to check how it went.
In America we would justify it by saying they were poor blacks.
I don't know how the Chinese expect to do it. Perhaps without a free press they don't have too?
I would think that nerf darts littering the campus would be a more likely reason. Wither that or some important visitor got hit by a stray.
The EULA is not a red herring.
People are having software that they have no license to use being automatically installed on their systems. I would think a term like that is not valid (non-obvious terms may not be valid in the US), but if it does hold, they will have millions of people in the US infringing on their IP. If they decide they are desperate and start suing (not likely any time soon) there are a lot of potential targets.
This is like the RIAA giving away MP3s on their website, saying "you agree to listen to this on only RIAA approved devices". When you suddenly have millions of people acting innocently illegally using your product it is not good for them.
Don't we need a video, not a screenshot?
I though the animation was part of passing.
Clearly I am simply a US centric asshole American then.
I would be surprised, but not skeptic if there are no T1s or equivalent in Canada, Australia, or wherever it is with provinces and worse broadband than us in the US. Where I work we pay close to twice the number in the link, it downloads at a quarter the speed of my home cable (but uploads triple) and includes 12 phone lines. We also get real uptime guarantees. Still, it is a lot of money for not much speed.
If you are speaking as an end user I recommend you read your contract and stop acting like it does not allow for shenanigans.
They are usually VERY clear that you are paying for up to a certain number of tubes, and they will arbitrarily take away your maximum number of tubes if they decide you use them too much.
I'm not saying it's right, just that it is a little dis-ingenuous to pretend you didn't sign something that says I'll bend over and beg you for more.
If you really want your tube (and it is only one max all the time) all for yourself with no one else interfering and up all the time, it is available (that's a low price too).
I do agree that it would be nice (and probably should even be required in exchange for the monopoly) if providers had true unlimited, or even limited with the limits spelled out access, but I doubt anyone running into trouble with the current system would like the rates they see.
It's been working fairly well for me (I have been using since way too long ago, and must in the future remember to at least wait for Beta).
.docx support. The compositing gnome window manager is nice though, and the new way it displays copying files is fantastic. Shelf in Compiz is really great too, and one of the few flashy things I find useful.
I have had very few audio problems.
I did have Amarock stop making sound at one point, and had to configure it to use pulsaudio (by default I think it was auto-detecting?)
Currently (noticed last night) vlc is making no noise, and I have been using Movie Player (Xine) instead. I would guess it is a similar problem.
Audio does seem more prone to skipping than it should (but I have no comparison, and it reall just be my hitting the disk really hard causing it).
The most useful thing in the new version for me has been
There was recently a problem with updates that caused an un-bootable system, which I don't hold against them, and I still updated another computer to 8.04 after it (a week ago), but it is a fair waring about using pre-release software.
A DHCP request would be asking for permission.
a DHCP response would be permission.
hiding your fake key is like using 1111111111111 as your WEP key (ASCII 128 bit)
a DHCP response is much closer to broadcasting come on into my house, it's unlocked, and the interesting stuff (gateway) in the kitchen. I would think if I had a low power FM transmitter broadcasting something to that effect and people came into my house they would have every right. In fact like the FM transmitter it is a type of essage that is not human readable, and needs special machinery to interperet.
The analogy between a locked house with a hidden key and an unsecured wireless network responding DHCP requests would be terrible even for bad analogy guy.
I will accept that if someone's SSID specifically says not to use it there is a case, but without any evidence to the contrary signals coming into my property (either my car in public space or my house) inviting me to use their transmitter/receiver to access the internet (providing a gateway) any sane person would say that it is permission to use them.
I agree,
That difference IMO would be supplying a gateway.
Easy,
If you ask for permission (DHCP Request) and the equipment says (to paraphrase) "absolutley, come on 0:0c:fa:a8:gc:bb hear is where I keep the gateway to the internet, I will make sure to send you data that comes for you, and direct any data you send to the correct place.", than absolutely the have permission.
If you have to monkey around setting up static addressing, or finding keys or what not, than it enters a gray area.
I imagine it will be like Office XP to Office 2007.
In other words, if you know how to use the program not too big a deal after a few hours using it. The built in help will get you most of the way, along with a little bit of searching for words you recognize.
The real problem is with the people that use it like a robot and don't really know how to use the program at all.
Wow, a whole 30GB?
Aren't they talking about way bigger numbers than that?
2 Linux Distros (9GB)
Firefox (negligible)
Spybot (negligible)
times 3 to keep your ratio (1 down 2 up)
The trouble is people doing WAY more than that.
I would recomend people running into trouble to pay a little money and get Usenet access. I pay $24 for a 100GB block of download (no time limit). This is about 100 hours + of good quality video (somewhere between DVD and HDTV). I usually get 500KB/s download (though sometimes it is down aroun 200).
For recent stuff it is easier to find a good NZB than a good torrent, and bandwidth usage is WAY lower (even when taking into account that checksumming overhead of PAR files).
Every now and again torrents are useful for older things, but most stuff is just way more convenient to get from the news servers.
I don't think Social Security should be about saving for retirement.
It should be about sharing the risk of exceptional longevity, so we don't have old people starving to death. It really should only kick in at some point past expected life expectancy.
The fact that you don't put enough into your 401K means you are living beyond your means, and is the type of behavior that caused a need for social security to begin with (in the early part of the century "beyond your means" was much more likely to mean 3 meals a day though).
Here is a great "Youtube for Porn". Don't worry when it asks you to install codec.exe. The videos are so HOT we had to use our very own custom codec.
I'd say that an obligation to parent responsibly should have superseded the need for "decency timeslots" from square one. Just my opinion...
As you use a logging system in a DVR. Parents can't watch their children constantly, and there is stuff I wouldn't want my children to see at the very least (or the neighbors honestly, but I will defer to them on that). Nothing so bad on broadcast TV or even cable, this would be a brief example fromt he top of my head of 15 minutes that should not be viewed by children.
On "socialism security", you're absolutely right. It will be dead and gone by the time any non-baby boomer reaches eligibility ( esp. once they raise the eligibility age to the high 80's to stave off collapse ).
God forbid the program return to where it started (and should have remained). When Social Security was started it was for people past the average life expectancy. It should be re-adjusted to better reflect that, and God willing before the Baby Boomers bankrupt it. If one were to look at long term trends though, it makes more sense to punish the younger generation to get things into a sustainable check (each generation pays for itself), rather than the old (economically the younger generation is almost always better off than the older).
The know how to get them all into one institution doing work for one of our companies at one of our schools has to count for something.
God forbid the bill may not pass.
I mean what will we ever do if some extended powers expire, and the telecoms don't get immunity.
The thing about this bill is that it is shit. If the house keeps on with leaving immunity out (twice so far), and the president won't accept it without immunity, we win double. This bills failure to pass is a win for the American people (and its passing is a win for the terrorists, whom will have succeeded in making our country more like theirs).