Does either one allow GPL applications distributed?
The Apple AppStore most certainly does - see, for example, the wonderful MobileOrg which is GPLv2 (certainly not the only example - just the first one that came to mind)
IANAL and AFAIK, doesn't GPL 2 allow charging for distribution of executable code, as long as the source is available somewhere?
All versions of the GPL allow charging for distribution - see http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/selling.html In particular the bit that says: "Actually, we encourage people who redistribute free software to charge as much as they wish or can".
People who do not understand the RFCs for email should NOT be selling mail servers.
People who don't understand RFCs shouldn't be selling _any_ kind of server - but probably don't realise they don't understand the RFCs (or, more likely, have never even heard of an RFC). Which means that they'll continue to sell servers for as long as other people (who also don't understand RFCs) continue to buy them.
The + thing is handy when you're giving an email address to someone trustworthy - but it's no protection from spam. You shouldn't be surprised that spammers will happily strip the "+whatever" from gmail addresses that they acquire.
I see both of them in the store (priced £5.99 and £1.19) - are you looking in the right app store? (These are in the Mac App Store, not the iPhone store).
Mind you, looking at the screen shots, the graphics on the "non pirate" version look pretty bad. Bad enough that I wouldn't buy it, even at the lower "pirate" price.
It's not beyond the realms of possibility that this is all a publicity stunt to get the games pushed up the search rankings (anyone who's spent any time trying to make money from "App Store" development will tell you that rankings are everything)
That doesn't really apply in this case - the bullshitters have the money (so, nothing new there then - or had you not noticed the amount of crap that the monied mega-corps get away with?) More like "Money talks, everything else bends over and reaches for the vaseline."
Failure to even show up is a vote of no confidence in the system itself
No, it's a "vote" of not caring about the outcome - those that don't vote get the government they deserve.
After an election, the only people who have any right to complain about the result are those that cast a vote for somebody who didn't win - those that voted for the winner got what they asked for; those that didn't vote got what they asked for.
That being said, actual abstentions (those that select "none of the above" or its equivalent) should be counted; if they're more than a certain proportion (say 30% or so) of the votes cast, then a new election should be held.
the article mentions bicyclists, which I doubt is relevant to the blind pedestrian issue
Not relevant to the blind pedestrian issue, but certainly relevant to the inattentiveness issue. My daily commute is about 10 minutes walk each way. In the last three years, I've never once been hit by a car (or even an EV) - but on three occasions I've been struck by cyclists who are ignoring red lights at clearly marked pedestrian crossings.
If EV's reduce the number of cyclists on the road, then bring 'em on.
Perhaps they could get the people who have been scammed to report the telephone number and work with the teleco's to find out where the scammers are hiding?
Nice idea in theory; in practice, these scammers:
Know how to hide their number from caller ID
Operate outside of the UK, so there's little (if anything) that the telco can do
Slashdot Mirror
Does either one allow GPL applications distributed?
The Apple AppStore most certainly does - see, for example, the wonderful MobileOrg which is GPLv2 (certainly not the only example - just the first one that came to mind)
IANAL and AFAIK, doesn't GPL 2 allow charging for distribution of executable code, as long as the source is available somewhere?
All versions of the GPL allow charging for distribution - see http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/selling.html
In particular the bit that says: "Actually, we encourage people who redistribute free software to charge as much as they wish or can".
Thanks
You're very welcome.
When I bought my copy of volume 1, he hadn't published volume 2.
Just now it's more of a jumble of piles.
Is "jumble of piles" one of the data structures he's going to cover in Vol 5b?
now all I use it for is watching downloaded films and tv shows on.
There are much better/quieter/cheaper products for doing that.
People who do not understand the RFCs for email should NOT be selling mail servers.
People who don't understand RFCs shouldn't be selling _any_ kind of server - but probably don't realise they don't understand the RFCs (or, more likely, have never even heard of an RFC). Which means that they'll continue to sell servers for as long as other people (who also don't understand RFCs) continue to buy them.
The + thing is handy when you're giving an email address to someone trustworthy - but it's no protection from spam. You shouldn't be surprised that spammers will happily strip the "+whatever" from gmail addresses that they acquire.
Soon to be Anonymous Coward 0000000000000000001.
Bad call - I'd have picked Anonymous Coward 007.
I see both of them in the store (priced £5.99 and £1.19) - are you looking in the right app store? (These are in the Mac App Store, not the iPhone store).
Mind you, looking at the screen shots, the graphics on the "non pirate" version look pretty bad.
Bad enough that I wouldn't buy it, even at the lower "pirate" price.
It's not beyond the realms of possibility that this is all a publicity stunt to get the games pushed up the search rankings (anyone who's spent any time trying to make money from "App Store" development will tell you that rankings are everything)
Money talks, bullshit walks.
That doesn't really apply in this case - the bullshitters have the money (so, nothing new there then - or had you not noticed the amount of crap that the monied mega-corps get away with?)
More like "Money talks, everything else bends over and reaches for the vaseline."
Can you immigine a 2 hour flight with some person yacking away the entire time getting loud and annoying
This is unlikely to happen with current cellphone technology - there are very few cell towers at 30,000 feet.
You know the type...
Sadly, I do *sigh*
Obligatory....
In Soviet Russia, Internet destroys Netflix ...
The problem there is that if you don't respond to changes in requirements, then you end up building software that nobody wants.
Really..? FOX News shouldn't be used as a reference
Obligatory FTFY...
But, being Slashdot, no one is amazed you didn't RTFA.
But, being Slashdot, everyone is amazed that you RTFA...
Failure to even show up is a vote of no confidence in the system itself
No, it's a "vote" of not caring about the outcome - those that don't vote get the government they deserve.
After an election, the only people who have any right to complain about the result are those that cast a vote for somebody who didn't win - those that voted for the winner got what they asked for; those that didn't vote got what they asked for.
That being said, actual abstentions (those that select "none of the above" or its equivalent) should be counted; if they're more than a certain proportion (say 30% or so) of the votes cast, then a new election should be held.
I think they actually use Nitrates (i.e. fertilizer)
So what you're saying is, they're full of shit?
Lawnmowers don't mow lawns - people mow lawns.
In other countries, there are much larger proportions of hybrids.
[citation needed]
I hope whatever measure is taken doesn't make EVs annoying
Too late.
the article mentions bicyclists, which I doubt is relevant to the blind pedestrian issue
Not relevant to the blind pedestrian issue, but certainly relevant to the inattentiveness issue. My daily commute is about 10 minutes walk each way. In the last three years, I've never once been hit by a car (or even an EV) - but on three occasions I've been struck by cyclists who are ignoring red lights at clearly marked pedestrian crossings.
If EV's reduce the number of cyclists on the road, then bring 'em on.
This is also a good thing - but it's also something completely different.
None of these power adapters have the name of the manufacturer of the actual device, so they get lost
Here's a tip: Invest in some sticky labels, and some form of writing implement.
But you're right - it's insane the number of different adapters I have sitting in boxes all over the place.
... decide on how the polarity is expressed...
Yet another thing that MagSafe gets right.
On the other hand, nowhere does it say that the standard could not be MagSafe.
Indeed not; in fact, I'd imagine Apple would love it to be MagSafe - just think of the patent licensing fees.
Perhaps they could get the people who have been scammed to report the telephone number and work with the teleco's to find out where the scammers are hiding?
Nice idea in theory; in practice, these scammers: