I think that's the entire purpose of an API - allowing interoperability. The goal of interoperability has been found to be sufficient justification to allow reverse engineering of undocumented APIs; if you document your API, you're expecting folks to use it. So yeah, it's both fair and legal for them to use it. And sure, most folks expect the users of an API to treat it as a spec on how clients talk to the server, but it's equally a spec on how the server talks to the clients, and I see no reason why writing a new server that talks to existing clients is any less legitimate than writing a new client that talks to an existing server.
Now, the _data_ that the server may have and provide is a different matter. If I build a server that can talk to your clients, I have to come up with my own data to talk to them about. But that's not part of the API.
Indeed. Sadly, we have no real chance of people getting into office who will do the right thing because it makes them feel good to help their fellow citizens.
which is why we should sell fuel by the pound, like they do for airplanes. (Okay, the kilogram.) If we want to get silly-technical, by the kilogram of (carbons that are not already linked with oxygen - take that, gasohol).
I'm not sure I'd agree that it's he-said she-said when there are in fact recordings that prove exactly who said what. However, it sounds like the only way they'll come out is if he files a slander/libel suit against Comcast, and to do that he likely has to get the email they sent so he actually knows what they said about him, which will probably require a wrongful termination suit against his ex-employer.
I think they are underestimating the low-carbon methods of producing electricity, but a factor of 5 increase in total output while reducing the carbon footprint - heck, even just keeping the footprint unchanged - is still a tall order. I would _love_ to see it happen.
As for 500 years from now, I figure either power usage will drop drastically as we go extinct or we'll be able to just move Earth out to about the orbit of Mars or Jupiter and drop the solar influx from 3e16W to something we can cope with. (As well as moving a bunch of stuff to orbit and having its heat go elsewhere:)
true. But this is a case where (usually) the application has no way to try to fix whatever the underlying problem is, so you're still going to have to choose between ignoring it and terminating.
I'd have things automatically close()d when they leave scope instead of requiring the programmer to remember that this item needs a close(). The new automatic close feature in try blocks is close, but the project I'm working on isn't using that version of java yet.
Heh. In my java programming I more often have C++ envy; I would _love_ to have real destructors. Most of my other gripes with C++ libraries are probably more a matter of familiarity than of real shortcomings. However, I cannot disagree with the point that for a kernel in particular, small/focused beats heck out of generalized libraries and behind-the-curtain operations.
I doubt it's the least helpful summary only because it does contain one informative sentence: "It's a new material that can accept light from an very large number of angles and can withstand the very high temperatures needed for a maximally efficient scheme."
Sure, anyone connected to the grid is likely to be drawing power from it at some point. But the point that has the energy companies up in arms is that over the course of a month, some people will not be net consumers, and the current billing system is not designed to handle that in a realistic fashion.
This. I have no problem at all if they want to split my bill into two parts, a fixed cost for just being hooked up and an incremental cost for generating the electricity I consume, as long as the two costs are calculated sanely. The proper fix is to adjust the tariffs to reflect the growing reality of universal connection without universal consumption.
This. Yes, right now Tesla is absolutely a fringe player. But all the signs seem to point to them growing to be much more substantial, especially once (as Bob himself said) they get their next tier of lower price, less frills up and running.
Not necessarily. Some states (I know CA, and someone else mentioned Massachusetts) will consider a car that enters the state less than X years/miles after purchase to be taxable (although CA, at least, considers how much sales tax you paid in the state you bought it as part of the calculation of how much you owe in CA sales tax.)
Slashdot Mirror
I think that's the entire purpose of an API - allowing interoperability. The goal of interoperability has been found to be sufficient justification to allow reverse engineering of undocumented APIs; if you document your API, you're expecting folks to use it. So yeah, it's both fair and legal for them to use it. And sure, most folks expect the users of an API to treat it as a spec on how clients talk to the server, but it's equally a spec on how the server talks to the clients, and I see no reason why writing a new server that talks to existing clients is any less legitimate than writing a new client that talks to an existing server.
Now, the _data_ that the server may have and provide is a different matter. If I build a server that can talk to your clients, I have to come up with my own data to talk to them about. But that's not part of the API.
A lot of folks seem to leave out that last step :)
They are supposed to only foreclose on mortgages they own. It didn't actually work out that way...
Indeed. Sadly, we have no real chance of people getting into office who will do the right thing because it makes them feel good to help their fellow citizens.
which is why we should sell fuel by the pound, like they do for airplanes. (Okay, the kilogram.) If we want to get silly-technical, by the kilogram of (carbons that are not already linked with oxygen - take that, gasohol).
Canyonero!
I'm not sure I'd agree that it's he-said she-said when there are in fact recordings that prove exactly who said what. However, it sounds like the only way they'll come out is if he files a slander/libel suit against Comcast, and to do that he likely has to get the email they sent so he actually knows what they said about him, which will probably require a wrongful termination suit against his ex-employer.
of course it's not a good excuse. That doesn't and never will mean that it does not motivate people to accept more risk.
This is a job for Moller!
That is, as it happens, part of the issue: Poettering's view of Linux is not Unix-y.
Even a lot of engineering can fall back to 2 significant figures, because once you've added a safety margin the precision just isn't usually critical.
I think they are underestimating the low-carbon methods of producing electricity, but a factor of 5 increase in total output while reducing the carbon footprint - heck, even just keeping the footprint unchanged - is still a tall order. I would _love_ to see it happen.
As for 500 years from now, I figure either power usage will drop drastically as we go extinct or we'll be able to just move Earth out to about the orbit of Mars or Jupiter and drop the solar influx from 3e16W to something we can cope with. (As well as moving a bunch of stuff to orbit and having its heat go elsewhere :)
true. But this is a case where (usually) the application has no way to try to fix whatever the underlying problem is, so you're still going to have to choose between ignoring it and terminating.
I'd have things automatically close()d when they leave scope instead of requiring the programmer to remember that this item needs a close(). The new automatic close feature in try blocks is close, but the project I'm working on isn't using that version of java yet.
Heh. In my java programming I more often have C++ envy; I would _love_ to have real destructors. Most of my other gripes with C++ libraries are probably more a matter of familiarity than of real shortcomings. However, I cannot disagree with the point that for a kernel in particular, small/focused beats heck out of generalized libraries and behind-the-curtain operations.
So this is part of a collective hallucination?
I doubt it's the least helpful summary only because it does contain one informative sentence: "It's a new material that can accept light from an very large number of angles and can withstand the very high temperatures needed for a maximally efficient scheme."
Ah, to have enough room to have enough tools... :)
They get their music by having their customers upload it.
Well, after avoiding 9, going to Windows DS9 would be silly, but Windows Voyager could work.
This (and the AC's mention of German) makes more sense than anything else I've heard :)
Sure, anyone connected to the grid is likely to be drawing power from it at some point. But the point that has the energy companies up in arms is that over the course of a month, some people will not be net consumers, and the current billing system is not designed to handle that in a realistic fashion.
This. I have no problem at all if they want to split my bill into two parts, a fixed cost for just being hooked up and an incremental cost for generating the electricity I consume, as long as the two costs are calculated sanely. The proper fix is to adjust the tariffs to reflect the growing reality of universal connection without universal consumption.
This. Yes, right now Tesla is absolutely a fringe player. But all the signs seem to point to them growing to be much more substantial, especially once (as Bob himself said) they get their next tier of lower price, less frills up and running.
Not necessarily. Some states (I know CA, and someone else mentioned Massachusetts) will consider a car that enters the state less than X years/miles after purchase to be taxable (although CA, at least, considers how much sales tax you paid in the state you bought it as part of the calculation of how much you owe in CA sales tax.)