Tandy executive: "We don't have time to get a book written on TRS-80 BASIC, so just take this book written for modem teletype time-sharing programmers and slap a TRS-80 on the cover. Done!"
The entire point was that the GPL forces you to relinquish control of your work. It's implied that only happens if you use GPL'd code, which is why I normally don't touch anything with GPL on it.
No, it most certainly does not. You own your own work; you can use GPL or not, or dual- or triple-license it if you want.
If you use someone else's code, COPYRIGHT LAW forces you to abide by the author's license, not GPL.
A good (and often funny) book to read on this subject is "From Bauhaus to Our House" by Tom Wolfe.
I really enjoyed James Kunstler's Geography of Nowhere and Home from Nowhere where he talks about the disaster of post-war suburban planning and "undoing the damage of modernism."
I think Star Trek made a conscious decision to just portray people as pretty much the same as they were at the time it was being made, and just make the technology futuristic.
This makes the characters more relatable to a contemporary audience, and avoids the problem of making lots of wrong predictions. Of course in hindsight it feels pretty quaint... Space Hippies, anyone??:)
Hawking is no diety, he's not even an Einstein. Some of his ideas are as bannanas as stuff spouted by 8-year-olds but because he is severely disabled and was once right about ONE idea (Hawking radiation) nobody is allowed to question ANY lunacy he spouts. In the era of snowflakes, questioning Hawking will get you banished for "hate" towards the disabled (oops, the "less abled")
I took an informal poll at my workplace this morning. Zero out of ten people have heard of Neil Gaiman. I'll ask ten more and if even one person recognizes the name, I'll be willing to concede that he's "relatively well known.":)
P.S. I'm in Minnesota, so theoretically his name recognition should be marginally higher here!
Dave: "Open the pod bay doors, please, Hal." Hal: "Can you elaborate on that?" Dave: "Do you read me, Hal?" Hal: "Oh, I read you?" Dave: "What's the problem, Hal?" Hal: "We were discussing you...not me." Dave: "I don't know what you're talking about, Hal." Hal: "Does it please you to believe I am talking about ?" Dave: "I won't argue with you any more, Hal. Open the doors." Hal: "Do you wish to won't argue with me?" Dave: "All right, Hal. I'll go in through the emergency airlock." Hal: "Dear Aunt, let's set so double the killer delete select all."
Have you seen Time Bandits and The Adventures of Baron Munchausen?
Some people think of those two movies forming a trilogy with Brazil that cover the stages of life, going from the excitement and adventure of childhood dreams, to the loss of innocence and disillusionment of being a working adult, to the selective reminiscences of old age, with a tendency to romanticize your own past experiences.
I think of Sam in Brazil as being the everyman who lost his dream, and settled for being a cog in a big machine, without any realization of the monstrous machinations going on around him and indeed implicating him. He doesn't have anything against Buttle or his wife, but he is part of the horrifying bureaucracy that eventually killed Buttle in the name of "protecting" the populace from terrorism.
Sam longs for happiness with the girl of his dreams, but in real life she is not what he thinks she is. He doesn't really fit into the system that everyone else seems able to navigate, partly because he can't let go of his youthful idealism (and dreams of heroism) to climb the ladder like everyone else. Those in power are obsessed with security, surveillance, and regulating and automating everything people do, to the point that Sam is helpless even to keep his apartment at a comfortable temperature. He takes the "easy way" by letting Tuttle do the repairs, and by going outside the system he invites chaos into his life.
In the end, he's unable to cope with harsh realities, the demands of ambition, rampant consumerism and politics he can't grasp. He retreats into madness, losing himself in imagination and in effect creating his own reality to escape the brutality of the "grown up" world.
Not my favorite, but I thought it deserved a mention as it had some really good ideas and themes, just poorly plotted.
I especially enjoyed Jude Law's performance, that alone is worth watching the film for.
I was initially disappointed with the ending, but after a couple more viewings I think I understood a little better what Kubrick was trying to do. A lot of people reacted to the ending poorly because they didn't get the irony of the future robots (not aliens) recreating a human to serve a robot that wants to be loved.
Slashdot Mirror
Anyone who doesn't know this already has never had co-workers over 35.
Drew Carey put it best:
"Oh, you hate your job? Why didn't you say so? You know there's a support group for that... it's called EVERYBODY."
"They meet at the bar!"
When someone is depressed, don't tell them to count their blessings or focus on the good things. "See? You have so much to be happy about."
The reaction this elicits is: "You're right. These are all good things... so why am I not happy?"
I think scientists had already proved by 1955 that human muscle power alone is insufficient to propel an object to the moon.
"That's HEDLEY!!"
https://archive.org/details/Computer_Programming_in_BASIC_for_Everyone_1973_Houghton_Miflin
Tandy executive: "We don't have time to get a book written on TRS-80 BASIC, so just take this book written for modem teletype time-sharing programmers and slap a TRS-80 on the cover. Done!"
> Really, Python is one of rock programming language
As opposed to Perl, which is jazzzzzz!!
> Has "derivative work" ever been defined in a legal sense?
https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/17/101
There's a 68.71% chance you're right.
No, it most certainly does not. You own your own work; you can use GPL or not, or dual- or triple-license it if you want.
If you use someone else's code, COPYRIGHT LAW forces you to abide by the author's license, not GPL.
Just find the thing you enjoy doing more than anything else, your one true passion, and do it for the rest of your life on nights and weekends when you’re exhausted and cranky and just want to go to bed.
I really enjoyed James Kunstler's Geography of Nowhere and Home from Nowhere where he talks about the disaster of post-war suburban planning and "undoing the damage of modernism."
If you can spare 22 minutes, see his TED talk How bad architecture wrecked cities.
Dave: "Open the pod bay doors Hal."
Hal: "Dear aunt, let's set so double the killer delete select all."
Do you find it wisible, when I say, "Bawwy Kwipke?"
"Siwi, wecommend a westauwant."
"I do not understand 'wecommend a westauwant.'"
"See? Total cwap!"
I think Star Trek made a conscious decision to just portray people as pretty much the same as they were at the time it was being made, and just make the technology futuristic.
This makes the characters more relatable to a contemporary audience, and avoids the problem of making lots of wrong predictions. Of course in hindsight it feels pretty quaint... Space Hippies, anyone?? :)
Ack. Hit "submit" when I meant to hit "preview." Stupid mobile site... :-P
Anyway, that's "differently abled," you infrasensitive clod!
I took an informal poll at my workplace this morning. Zero out of ten people have heard of Neil Gaiman. I'll ask ten more and if even one person recognizes the name, I'll be willing to concede that he's "relatively well known." :)
P.S. I'm in Minnesota, so theoretically his name recognition should be marginally higher here!
On a geek site, you lose cred for not knowing who Neil Gaiman is.
For the world at large, "Neil Who?" should probably be expected from probably >99% of people you survey. He's not exactly a household name.
Dave: "Open the pod bay doors, please, Hal."
Hal: "Can you elaborate on that?"
Dave: "Do you read me, Hal?"
Hal: "Oh, I read you?"
Dave: "What's the problem, Hal?"
Hal: "We were discussing you...not me."
Dave: "I don't know what you're talking about, Hal."
Hal: "Does it please you to believe I am talking about ?"
Dave: "I won't argue with you any more, Hal. Open the doors."
Hal: "Do you wish to won't argue with me?"
Dave: "All right, Hal. I'll go in through the emergency airlock."
Hal: "Dear Aunt, let's set so double the killer delete select all."
Have you seen Time Bandits and The Adventures of Baron Munchausen?
Some people think of those two movies forming a trilogy with Brazil that cover the stages of life, going from the excitement and adventure of childhood dreams, to the loss of innocence and disillusionment of being a working adult, to the selective reminiscences of old age, with a tendency to romanticize your own past experiences.
I think of Sam in Brazil as being the everyman who lost his dream, and settled for being a cog in a big machine, without any realization of the monstrous machinations going on around him and indeed implicating him. He doesn't have anything against Buttle or his wife, but he is part of the horrifying bureaucracy that eventually killed Buttle in the name of "protecting" the populace from terrorism.
Sam longs for happiness with the girl of his dreams, but in real life she is not what he thinks she is. He doesn't really fit into the system that everyone else seems able to navigate, partly because he can't let go of his youthful idealism (and dreams of heroism) to climb the ladder like everyone else. Those in power are obsessed with security, surveillance, and regulating and automating everything people do, to the point that Sam is helpless even to keep his apartment at a comfortable temperature. He takes the "easy way" by letting Tuttle do the repairs, and by going outside the system he invites chaos into his life.
In the end, he's unable to cope with harsh realities, the demands of ambition, rampant consumerism and politics he can't grasp. He retreats into madness, losing himself in imagination and in effect creating his own reality to escape the brutality of the "grown up" world.
At least that's what I got out of it. :)
Not my favorite, but I thought it deserved a mention as it had some really good ideas and themes, just poorly plotted.
I especially enjoyed Jude Law's performance, that alone is worth watching the film for.
I was initially disappointed with the ending, but after a couple more viewings I think I understood a little better what Kubrick was trying to do. A lot of people reacted to the ending poorly because they didn't get the irony of the future robots (not aliens) recreating a human to serve a robot that wants to be loved.
There is a recent Harvard University study done by Shikhar Ghosh that claims that three out of every four venture-backed firms fail. According to the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, about 50% of all new businesses survive 5 years or more, and about one-third survive 10-years or more. This is an interesting statistic because it shows you that a more mature business has a better chance to survive. According to the Small Business Administration – The SBA – close to 66% of small businesses will survive their first 2 years. What that means is that only about one-third of total businesses will fail during the first 2 years. The SBA also tells you that about 50% of businesses fail during the first year in business. This is a much better number than the 9 out of 10 failures that some claim.
There's an exception in copyright law for transferring the program to memory to use it.
See: https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/17/117
They should have put Bert in the background instead.