When asked it seems they did obtain and provide the source code that they believe was required - and as supplied y their supplier. \ It appears however that more was wanted, and the argument is about how far the GPL extends. From a bit of digging it looks like the actual items in questions were not IPTABLES at all, however were the code they used to create IPTABLES configurations - REALLY? that seems a pretty damn long stretch, calling that art of IPTABLES, dont you think?
The GPL people are not doing themselves favours when it comes to being adoption friendly - we see this time and time again where they are as clear as mud as to what 'counts' right up until they want to drag you in to court, at which time it becomes a crapshoot (and they have little to lose) as the judges often have little technical understanding.
Do you ever sold a car? a microwave? a cellphone? a watch?
All of them contain software, I damn well hope you obtained all the sourcecode for their software and had it fully checked for all license compliance, as otherwise you are responsible in exactly the same way. The people who SOLD the non-complant software ORIGINALLY should be responsible, however thats not whats being done here.
THAT is why this is bad, for everyone. In fact the GPL doesnt even require you to sell it, is lending your car to someone distribution? There are certainly those who would argue it is on the side of the GPL, hope you got those software audits done!
THAT is why the GPL over extends in this case.
Why was the software supplier not the target? Not 'big time' enough?
Actually no, if you read what is written here, or take time to do any actual research, you will find that people gernally get flames/abused for doing really quite stupid things, and then often trying to defend those things beyond all normal sense.
If you find this so difficult, I can only imagine how well you will do in a work environment, where managers will often abuse you for doing something quite sensible but not 'their way', for trying to solve problems without their direct involvement, etc, etc.
You seem pretty convinced you have talent and valuable contributions to make, but you dont seem to understand that if you *dont* have talent and valuable contributions, but instead annoy others and cause problems, people may not be happy, and may act accordingly.
Oh, and by the way, 'having fun' is a pretty damn high level of expectation from just about everything...
This, I am sorry to say, is something only you can fix, not a 'problem with the community'.
Thing is, he's not wrong. Most consumers won't notice.
I certainly noticed when Google Chrome would not install on my android 2.3 phone, which LG refuse to provide any further updates for. In fact Google seem to be the most inclined to produce apps which will only run on the latest version of android and bugger anybody who hasn't thrown out last years tech and bought something new.
Most people with smartphones are on contracts that subsidize a new phone every two years. This is a problem that solves itself.
Should Google force every builder of Android devices to commit to updates for years? If they did this three years ago no manufacturer would have built Android hardware. If you think Android is fragmented, imagine every phone maker building their own OS.
No, most people IN AMERICA are on contracts that INCLUDE THE COST OF a new phone every two years
There, fixed that for you. When you would like to join the ranks of the thinking, not pay for a new phone every two years whether you like it or not, and therefore pay cheaper prices, feel free.
I would claim that Disney has a long and strong history of supporting (and being supported by) a very close relationship between their government and them, with the main of furthering their control and profitability. Thats how they broke our copyright system to further themselves financially, at the cost of society in general.
They also quite like to rewrite history and then use their position to strongly promote their new 'cleansed' view of it.
Not completely unlike a National Socialist view, really, which was strongly a a close relationship between an exclusive powerbase in government, and an exclusive powerbase in the private sector, with close likes, working together to control and guide the populace....
Waiting for the real science to begin in 3...2... oh wait, never?
Really, what exactly do they think these are actually useful for except for adding 'In Space' to a bunch of college programming projects? As these dont even use radiation hardened electronics of any ECC, I suspect investigating failure modes will be their main use.
Come on, the world is full of useful and interesting things to do, this just aint one of them people!
Great! Now can I please have a source implementation so I can use it directly? Can i have a free codec for all my machines (windows edit stations, linux render clusters?)
I'm not saything they dont exist, there are several, they all have issues of one form or another, though.
Yes, as far as I can tell thats a pretty solid 'will', closer to a 'may', but alpha there as far as I can tell is just another channel with no special consideration, unfortunately.
But of course, the more the merrier, its just a very under supported requirement, and one that is heavily used in content creation circles.
Most end up having to use png or target image sequences, or quicktime/animation codec for support, which are somewhat poor workflows.
If you want to have a good solid niche for this (always helps) then. 1 - support a reasonably efficient lossless mode (several others have this, but it is alsways useful) 2 - support ALPHA channels (32bit, RGBA, YUVA) - this is not trivial but very worthwhile, basically ZERO of the modern codec support this.
alpha channels are a requirement for many composition/editing/video production workflows, and yet the supporting codecs are old, clunky, and painful to use.
good alpha channel support is not trivial, but is usually not major also.
For extra points support lossless on alpha, and lossy on the other channels, that is a VERY good option for many workflows.
Gives alpha and lossless, you are pretty much guaranteed professional users.
And here we have a perfect example of (one of the reasons) why Greece has the problems it has. People so convinced that the are owed more of everything as to think that goods being sold by private companies can be price fixed by the government so they can afford them.
Hint: if people are not buying them, the companies will lower the price if they want to sell them, its called supply and demand.. if people want the products, the price will rise. Surely you are not going to try and convince us IKEA somehow has a monopoly on furniture that it is somehow using to force people to pay high prices?
The 'problem' with free markets is people reap what they (and their governments) sow, and greece has done a lot of sowing over the last few decades (as have many other countries).
Hint: if you want a higher quality of living, you have to be either smarter, or harder working, or willing to sacrifice more natural resources than others - not always pleasant, just a FACT.
Come on, are any of us shocked or surprised by any of this, or is it really just yet another confirmation of how the governments really consider us all guilty of something, and how common law (yes, that English institution) went by the by a long time ago?
I am waiting for the other penny to drop, when people start realising how much of that information gets funneled back in to large US corporations when they are working on major overseas deals, etc..
Perhaps people will start realising they need to protect their own privacy - by which I mean encryption, not our insightful American friends ideas about armed militias (hmm, yeah right). The tools have been there for a long time now, most people just dont take it seriously. At least then they need to let you know they want your information (at least for email, etc...).
They claim 1000 times better sensitivity than CMOS, which people seem to be swallowing hook line and sinker, however since there are plenty of current CMOS sensors with a Quantum Sensitiviy (QE) of 60% to 80% for visible light, how exactly will the convert 1000 times more efficiently than that? 1000 times less loss would take them from 80% to 99.99%, that thats only actually 20% better...
I would imagine they are measuring at an extreme wavelength that existing CMOS sensors do not target, hardly an advantage for the applications being discussed in the article (normal cameras).
Even quite boring consumer cameras have a QE of 20% to 40%..
As might i apparently right, if for example someone found a way of terrifying an entire populace through small actions well within their capability, relatively easily repeatable, inexpensive, that however create a very large effect on both the economics and social structure of the victim then they are on to a winner as that is a very effective way of creating might?
How does it feel to support terrorism?
Personally I like to consider morality somewhat important..
Well, it has been shown that missiles actually got set up and were operational, why did he not try and launch them?
Perhaps it is because what you say is false, and while he did want a lump of power thrown his way (as most similar small nations despot leaders want) he was not nearly stupid enough to use it?
Remember so far only one country has used nuclear weapons in anger, twice, without warning, and with no opportunity between for discussions (after all, there were 2 designs to test!), the same country that built, and still maintains the largest destructive capability using the same weapons, has been involved in more wars since than anyone else, has invaded more countries since than anyone else, and currently is trying harder and harder to enforce their own political/legal worldview over the rest of the world?
Because digging deeper it appears to be either completely false, or a horrific mis-translation, or most likely comletely made up.
The best I can find out, the facts are that the contractor wanted to be paid for another round of checking of everything, at a large cost, which the govt. was not willing to fund as there is little demand for the startup of the station now anyway, so why prepare to start up something thats being mothballed anyway. The only real news here seems to be a governement actually willing to cut back a bit of pork and wait until the may, some time in the future, actually need to continue with the station.
Firstly its an experimental facility that has not been run up yet, even for testing, and they are currently considering not testing it soon..
Secondly the decision is based on a re-evaluation of Japans actual need for a fast breeder immediately, and due to overspends by its contractors.
It is quite amazing how hard the anti-nuclear lobby will work to smokescreen any news as a near disaster and try and scare us all away with the nuclear apocalypse bogeyman..
Japans economy is in recession, their energy needs are falling, they are cutting back on spending that is currently not required. Any real news here?
Can someone comment on if he writing is actual Science Fiction, or Fantasy that now seems to be lumped in to Science Fiction on the basis that it happens 'in the future'? The comments I have seen so far seem to indicate that it is Fantasy, not Science Fiction, and it makes a difference to some of us. Not to detract from it of course! Just wondering.
The basic difference for those who care is fantasy is generally set in a middle ages like setting (although not always), and calls on magic or mysticism for its special abilities. Science fiction at least attempts to have a scientific explanation for the things that are done, and generally (but not always) does not show a regression to middle ages type society.
It seems nearly all of the discusssion here is about future-setting fantasy, rather than science fiction.
yawn, you seem to like a lot of hand waving about 'Statistics dont do that' without much understanding.
There is nothing special here, statistics work just as well here as they do in fusion and fission reactions, in effect very similar things (although there you are trying to create a runway system..). Neutron energy, absorbtion cross-sections, etc, etc.
You still need a bunch of requirements for a 'runaway reaction', and there is not NEARLY enough space junk to cause one, just as all the uranium in the earths crush does not just happen to spontaineously fission..
You should stop treating math as a magical field open to interpretation, and learn that it has real applications.
Yes, you can get a runaway reaction in space junk, no there is not even close to enough up there yet (or likely in the even medium future) for a runaway reaction, and by not even close I mean ORDERS of magnitude too little.
Nice SciFi, but only a little statistics will soon tell you that... Space is big, really really big (even the prefered orbits).
To sustain the required chain reaction you need a WHOLE lot more junk, and you also need it to be in particular orbits (too much of it is in somewhat similar orbits..)
Its 'bad' right now because of the high cost of a VERY rare event (a significant energy impact), not because impacts are common.
Impacts also tend not NOT produce a cloud of high energy objects, most objects are metalic and tend to be punched through rather than shatter (yes, even at the cool side of orbital temperatures).
Of course plenty of people (governments, etc) realise that there is a fair bit of valuable 'junk' up there, and its value will rise in the future, however we will not see any mandate for collecting it and keeping in orbit for reuse, simply because a LOT of it is far too classified - even the commercial stuff - if China for example started collecting up old US sattelites, I suspect there would be trouble, etc.
The thing to remember is this 'global warming type emergency' is bring proposed by the head of a body who would get funding to work on it - sound at all surprising?
Of course, the moment you actually accept a patch from someone else, you are no longer free to negotiate, as they will hold GPL rights over that section of the code... thats going to be fun in any long running multiple project. And if you are not going to accept any patches/updates, what again is the value of GPL?
Aha, another partial fallacy the GPL people love to push.
Technically true, however the moment you let someone else contribute to your source code (which, face it, is one of the points of open source software, no? or should every single contributor fork a project), you CANNOT, as they not also hold a GPL license right over the whole base, and unless everyone who contributes can agree, its locked under GPL..
So the GPL simply values the rights of the software to be 'free' over and above the rights of the developers who created and/or contributed to it, to control how they want to use that code.
Except their range is... not quite enough to get to Seoul.. northern most suburbs wont be happy though. And the repercussions would be somewhat complete.
You really think the leaders (and by which I mainly mean the military, not the puppet) want to lose their nice comfortable positions?
Lets also not forget that the linux kernel (and other projects) have done their share of jerking NVidia around also, in the name of forcing them to work in the way the OSS people want, rather than in the way NVidia is willing to (they make/sell the cards after all).
It pretty much looks to me that NVidia have been waiting for X Server support for the features, and can now support it since that has arrived.
Slashdot Mirror
No, thqats not what happened at all.
When asked it seems they did obtain and provide the source code that they believe was
required - and as supplied y their supplier. \
It appears however that more was wanted, and the argument is about how far the GPL extends.
From a bit of digging it looks like the actual items in questions were not IPTABLES at all, however
were the code they used to create IPTABLES configurations - REALLY? that seems a pretty damn
long stretch, calling that art of IPTABLES, dont you think?
The GPL people are not doing themselves favours when it comes to being adoption friendly - we see
this time and time again where they are as clear as mud as to what 'counts' right up until they want
to drag you in to court, at which time it becomes a crapshoot (and they have little to lose) as the
judges often have little technical understanding.
and this is software freedom?
Do you ever sold a car? a microwave? a cellphone? a watch?
All of them contain software, I damn well hope you obtained all the sourcecode for their software
and had it fully checked for all license compliance, as otherwise you are responsible in exactly
the same way. The people who SOLD the non-complant software ORIGINALLY should be
responsible, however thats not whats being done here.
THAT is why this is bad, for everyone.
In fact the GPL doesnt even require you to sell it, is lending your car to someone distribution?
There are certainly those who would argue it is on the side of the GPL, hope you got those software
audits done!
THAT is why the GPL over extends in this case.
Why was the software supplier not the target? Not 'big time' enough?
Actually no, if you read what is written here, or take time to do any actual research, you will find that people gernally get flames/abused for doing really quite stupid things, and then often trying to defend those things beyond all normal sense.
If you find this so difficult, I can only imagine how well you will do in a work environment, where managers will often abuse you for doing something quite sensible but not 'their way', for trying to solve problems without their direct involvement, etc, etc.
You seem pretty convinced you have talent and valuable contributions to make, but you dont seem to understand that if you *dont* have talent and valuable contributions, but instead annoy others and cause problems, people may not be happy, and may act accordingly.
Oh, and by the way, 'having fun' is a pretty damn high level of expectation from just about everything...
This, I am sorry to say, is something only you can fix, not a 'problem with the community'.
Thing is, he's not wrong. Most consumers won't notice.
I certainly noticed when Google Chrome would not install on my android 2.3 phone, which LG refuse to provide any further updates for.
In fact Google seem to be the most inclined to produce apps which will only run on the latest version of android and bugger anybody who hasn't thrown out last years tech and bought something new.
Most people with smartphones are on contracts that subsidize a new phone every two years. This is a problem that solves itself.
Should Google force every builder of Android devices to commit to updates for years? If they did this three years ago no manufacturer would have built Android hardware. If you think Android is fragmented, imagine every phone maker building their own OS.
No, most people IN AMERICA are on contracts that INCLUDE THE COST OF a new phone every two years
There, fixed that for you.
When you would like to join the ranks of the thinking, not pay for a new phone every two years whether you like it or not, and therefore pay cheaper prices, feel free.
I would claim that Disney has a long and strong history of supporting (and being supported by) a very close
relationship between their government and them, with the main of furthering their control and profitability.
Thats how they broke our copyright system to further themselves financially, at the cost of society in general.
They also quite like to rewrite history and then use their position to strongly promote their new 'cleansed' view of
it.
Not completely unlike a National Socialist view, really, which was strongly a a close relationship between an exclusive powerbase in government, and an exclusive powerbase in the private sector, with close likes, working together to control and guide the populace....
Waiting for the real science to begin in 3...2... oh wait, never?
Really, what exactly do they think these are actually useful for except for adding 'In Space' to a bunch of
college programming projects? As these dont even use radiation hardened electronics of any ECC, I
suspect investigating failure modes will be their main use.
Come on, the world is full of useful and interesting things to do, this just aint one of them people!
Great, can you please point me to an airplay implementation for my android phone and tablet?
Great!
Now can I please have a source implementation so I can use it directly?
Can i have a free codec for all my machines (windows edit stations, linux render clusters?)
I'm not saything they dont exist, there are several, they all have issues of one form or another, though.
Yes, as far as I can tell thats a pretty solid 'will', closer to a 'may', but alpha there as far as I can tell is just another
channel with no special consideration, unfortunately.
But of course, the more the merrier, its just a very under supported requirement, and one that is heavily used in content creation circles.
Most end up having to use png or target image sequences, or quicktime/animation codec for support, which are somewhat poor workflows.
If you want to have a good solid niche for this (always helps) then.
1 - support a reasonably efficient lossless mode (several others have this, but it is alsways useful)
2 - support ALPHA channels (32bit, RGBA, YUVA) - this is not trivial but very worthwhile, basically ZERO of the modern codec support this.
alpha channels are a requirement for many composition/editing/video production workflows, and yet the supporting codecs are old, clunky,
and painful to use.
good alpha channel support is not trivial, but is usually not major also.
For extra points support lossless on alpha, and lossy on the other channels, that is a VERY good option for many workflows.
Gives alpha and lossless, you are pretty much guaranteed professional users.
And here we have a perfect example of (one of the reasons) why Greece has the problems it has.
People so convinced that the are owed more of everything as to think that goods being sold by
private companies can be price fixed by the government so they can afford them.
Hint: if people are not buying them, the companies will lower the price if they want to sell them, its
called supply and demand.. if people want the products, the price will rise.
Surely you are not going to try and convince us IKEA somehow has a monopoly on furniture that it is
somehow using to force people to pay high prices?
The 'problem' with free markets is people reap what they (and their governments) sow, and greece
has done a lot of sowing over the last few decades (as have many other countries).
Hint: if you want a higher quality of living, you have to be either smarter, or harder working, or willing
to sacrifice more natural resources than others - not always pleasant, just a FACT.
And this surprises who, exactly?
Come on, are any of us shocked or surprised by any of this, or is it really just yet another confirmation of how the governments really consider us all
guilty of something, and how common law (yes, that English institution) went by the by a long time ago?
I am waiting for the other penny to drop, when people start realising how much of that information gets funneled back in to large US corporations
when they are working on major overseas deals, etc..
Perhaps people will start realising they need to protect their own privacy - by which I mean encryption, not our insightful American friends ideas about
armed militias (hmm, yeah right). The tools have been there for a long time now, most people just dont take it seriously.
At least then they need to let you know they want your information (at least for email, etc...).
They claim 1000 times better sensitivity than CMOS, which people seem to be swallowing hook line
and sinker, however since there are plenty of current CMOS sensors with a Quantum Sensitiviy (QE)
of 60% to 80% for visible light, how exactly will the convert 1000 times more efficiently than that?
1000 times less loss would take them from 80% to 99.99%, that thats only actually 20% better...
I would imagine they are measuring at an extreme wavelength that existing CMOS sensors do not target,
hardly an advantage for the applications being discussed in the article (normal cameras).
Even quite boring consumer cameras have a QE of 20% to 40%..
So let me just check if i understand you..
As might i apparently right, if for example someone found a way of terrifying an entire populace through small actions well within
their capability, relatively easily repeatable, inexpensive, that however create a very large effect on both the economics and social
structure of the victim then they are on to a winner as that is a very effective way of creating might?
How does it feel to support terrorism?
Personally I like to consider morality somewhat important..
Well, it has been shown that missiles actually got set up and were operational, why did he not try and launch them?
Perhaps it is because what you say is false, and while he did want a lump of power thrown his way (as most similar
small nations despot leaders want) he was not nearly stupid enough to use it?
Remember so far only one country has used nuclear weapons in anger, twice, without warning, and with no opportunity between
for discussions (after all, there were 2 designs to test!), the same country that built, and still maintains the largest destructive
capability using the same weapons, has been involved in more wars since than anyone else, has invaded more countries since
than anyone else, and currently is trying harder and harder to enforce their own political/legal worldview over the rest of the
world?
Just saying...
Because digging deeper it appears to be either completely false, or a horrific mis-translation, or most
likely comletely made up.
The best I can find out, the facts are that the contractor wanted to be paid for another round of checking
of everything, at a large cost, which the govt. was not willing to fund as there is little demand for the startup
of the station now anyway, so why prepare to start up something thats being mothballed anyway.
The only real news here seems to be a governement actually willing to cut back a bit of pork and wait until the
may, some time in the future, actually need to continue with the station.
So, you consider that news?
Firstly its an experimental facility that has not been run up yet, even for testing, and they are currently considering not testing it soon..
Secondly the decision is based on a re-evaluation of Japans actual need for a fast breeder immediately, and due to overspends by its
contractors.
It is quite amazing how hard the anti-nuclear lobby will work to smokescreen any news as a near disaster and try and scare
us all away with the nuclear apocalypse bogeyman..
Japans economy is in recession, their energy needs are falling, they are cutting back on spending that is currently not required.
Any real news here?
Can someone comment on if he writing is actual Science Fiction, or Fantasy that now seems to be lumped in to Science Fiction on the basis that it happens 'in the future'?
The comments I have seen so far seem to indicate that it is Fantasy, not Science Fiction, and it makes a difference to some of us.
Not to detract from it of course! Just wondering.
The basic difference for those who care is fantasy is generally set in a middle ages like setting (although not always), and calls on magic or mysticism for its special abilities. Science fiction at least attempts to have a scientific explanation for the things that are done, and generally (but not always) does not show a regression to middle ages type society.
It seems nearly all of the discusssion here is about future-setting fantasy, rather than science fiction.
The books certainly sound interesting however.
I believe its called 'too big to fail'
Also known as 'the people in power keep their money there'
yawn, you seem to like a lot of hand waving about 'Statistics dont do that' without much understanding.
There is nothing special here, statistics work just as well here as they do in fusion and fission reactions, in effect very similar things (although there you are trying to create a runway system..). Neutron energy, absorbtion cross-sections, etc, etc.
You still need a bunch of requirements for a 'runaway reaction', and there is not NEARLY enough space junk to cause one, just as all the uranium in the earths crush does not just happen to spontaineously fission..
You should stop treating math as a magical field open to interpretation, and learn that it has real applications.
Yes, you can get a runaway reaction in space junk, no there is not even close to enough up there yet (or likely in the even medium future) for a runaway reaction, and by not even close I mean ORDERS of magnitude too little.
Nice SciFi, but only a little statistics will soon tell you that...
Space is big, really really big (even the prefered orbits).
To sustain the required chain reaction you need a WHOLE lot more junk, and you also need it to be in particular orbits (too much of it is in somewhat similar orbits..)
Its 'bad' right now because of the high cost of a VERY rare event (a significant energy impact), not because impacts are common.
Impacts also tend not NOT produce a cloud of high energy objects, most objects are metalic and tend to be punched through rather than shatter (yes, even at the cool side of orbital temperatures).
Of course plenty of people (governments, etc) realise that there is a fair bit of valuable 'junk' up there, and its value will rise in the future, however we will not see any mandate for collecting it and keeping in orbit for reuse, simply because a LOT of it is far too classified - even the commercial stuff - if China for example started collecting up old US sattelites, I suspect there would be trouble, etc.
The thing to remember is this 'global warming type emergency' is bring proposed by the head of a body who would get funding to work on it - sound at all surprising?
Of course, the moment you actually accept a patch from someone else, you are no longer free to negotiate, as they will hold GPL rights over that section of the code... thats going to be fun in any long running multiple project.
And if you are not going to accept any patches/updates, what again is the value of GPL?
Aha, another partial fallacy the GPL people love to push.
Technically true, however the moment you let someone else contribute to your source code (which, face it, is one of the points of open source software, no? or should every single contributor fork a project), you CANNOT, as they not also hold a GPL license right over the whole base, and unless everyone who contributes can agree, its locked under GPL..
So the GPL simply values the rights of the software to be 'free' over and above the rights of the developers who created and/or contributed to it, to control how they want to use that code.
Except their range is... not quite enough to get to Seoul.. northern most suburbs wont be happy though.
And the repercussions would be somewhat complete.
You really think the leaders (and by which I mainly mean the military, not the puppet) want to lose their nice comfortable positions?
Quite Agree.
Lets also not forget that the linux kernel (and other projects) have done their share of jerking NVidia around also, in the name of forcing them to work in the way the OSS people want, rather than in the way NVidia is willing to (they make/sell the cards after all).
It pretty much looks to me that NVidia have been waiting for X Server support for the features, and can now support it since that has arrived.