The reason *why* ZFS doesn't ship with the kernel is mostly irrelevant. The fact remains--in order to use ZFS in Linux, you have to roll your own custom system. This is not a good thing for production.
Mixing licenses does not somehow make things "not production ready".
No, using a file system that doesn't ship with the kernel makes things "not production ready." Licensing is the reason why it doesn't ship with the kernel, but it's not shipping with the kernel that keeps it out of critical production use.
In a sane world, "a comprehensive review of copyright law" would lead to cutting copyright terms back drastically. Something on the order of 14 years plus an optional, one-time 14 year extension. This would take care of abandoned works (after 14 or 28 years they'd be public domain) and would enable us to simplify copyright law.
Disney will outright start shooting Congressmen before they let that happen.
You know, I keep reading these sorts of things, and it puzzles me. "I've never had an IKEA kit that wasn't screwed up somehow." "I've never had an IKEA instruction set that didn't have a mistake." I've bought I a fair amount of IKEA furniture (and am planning to get more in the near future) and never had any of these problems. I've had exactly one problem with IKEA furniture, and that was my fault (I assembled a shelf piece backwards so that the unfinished edge faced out). What am I doing wrong?
1. It's unlikely that the version she currently uses does not run on Win7
If she tried firing it up on Windows 7, it would probably run, yes, although having it fail is more likely than you might think. But it's not *certified* on Windows 7, so she can't do that. She likely would be legally liable if she did.
2. It's unlikely that the version she would upgrade to does not run on XP
Same deal as #1. It's not certified, you can't do that.
3. It's likely that the upgrade would cost $10,000 even if she wasn't changing OS versions
Yes, but she doesn't need to upgrade unless she changes the OS.
So why is "scarce" so much better than "in short supply"? I grant you, it's shorter, and that's a valid reason to prefer it, but it doesn't seem a grave enough sin to be a pet peeve.
If I publicly state the CEO of a company is essentially stealing from a voluntary funding program inside said company (think donation jar) for orphans and using it to buy 3 course meals for himself, because I'm angry it's happening and want the world to see how horrible he is, can I seriously be sued for defamation?
It's true! I don't understand how the law could punish me for bringing something horrible to light just because the guy might actually need to face the shame associated with his actions.
In order to be true but libel under these rules, it must not only be defamatory, but published with malicious intent. In your example, exposing the embezzling because of an honest desire to expose the crime would not be malicious and thus not libel.
The public would like the facts, as quickly as possible.
The news media only listened to the second half of that sentence. Much like their reporting.
That's because the second half of that sentence is effectively the important one. It's difficult to tell if a report is the facts. But it's easy to tell if it's first.
Money still fluctuates in value when you're on the gold standard. It just fluctuates in lockstep with the fluctuations in the value of gold. This means that it's unlikely to steadily decrease in value, but it doesn't mean it stops fluctuating.
*All* money fluctuates in value. Yes, even if you run on the gold standard (which I know you favor). Money that fluctuates too much isn't very good for money's intended purpose (as a means of exchange and a store of value, particularly the latter), but you can't say that something isn't money because it fluctuates. Was the Deutschmark not money during the hyperinflation of the 1920s?
That people do indeed have lots of accidents, and therefore driverless cars to not need to be perfect to be better.
That you can use Google and throw statistics around with abandon?
Damn facts.
Because it doesn't prove the OP's assertion to be correct.
Ah, yes, it does.
(In fact, given the ratio of drivers to accidents - it shows rather the opposite.)
Say what? It shows an accident rate of over 5% per year. If driverless cars have an accident rate of 3%, are they not therefore better, other things being equal? That is the OP's assertion.
That's not an argument against self-driving cars, that's an argument against driver-driven cars. Don't be surprised if manually driving your car becomes illegal, at least on highways.
So complex is it, it's the only organ in humans that is capable of self-regeneration. As little as 25% of one can regrow into a whole liver.
This would seem to imply to me that it would not be impossibly difficult to grow a new liver in a lab. All you have to do is hook into the self-regeneration properties and take advantage of them.
The really damaging part of the explosion wasn't the visible blast, but the BB shrapnel they packed in the bomb. You can't see that part directly in the video; I did notice people well away from the blast crumple and fall.
That's "41 megawatts" for those of you who prefer it in non-retarded units. In case you were wondering, that's 0.003% of the US's electrical generation capacity. Yeah, that's a real environmental disaster, there. It's not a problem, it's a rounding error.
Slashdot Mirror
The reason *why* ZFS doesn't ship with the kernel is mostly irrelevant. The fact remains--in order to use ZFS in Linux, you have to roll your own custom system. This is not a good thing for production.
No, using a file system that doesn't ship with the kernel makes things "not production ready." Licensing is the reason why it doesn't ship with the kernel, but it's not shipping with the kernel that keeps it out of critical production use.
Disney will outright start shooting Congressmen before they let that happen.
You know, I keep reading these sorts of things, and it puzzles me. "I've never had an IKEA kit that wasn't screwed up somehow." "I've never had an IKEA instruction set that didn't have a mistake." I've bought I a fair amount of IKEA furniture (and am planning to get more in the near future) and never had any of these problems. I've had exactly one problem with IKEA furniture, and that was my fault (I assembled a shelf piece backwards so that the unfinished edge faced out). What am I doing wrong?
Is that science you can only do if you're root?
Hey, it's eggs and milk! That's healthy!
If she tried firing it up on Windows 7, it would probably run, yes, although having it fail is more likely than you might think. But it's not *certified* on Windows 7, so she can't do that. She likely would be legally liable if she did.
Same deal as #1. It's not certified, you can't do that.
Yes, but she doesn't need to upgrade unless she changes the OS.
So why is "scarce" so much better than "in short supply"? I grant you, it's shorter, and that's a valid reason to prefer it, but it doesn't seem a grave enough sin to be a pet peeve.
Final conquest of Wales was in the 13th century, during the reign of Edward I.
In order to be true but libel under these rules, it must not only be defamatory, but published with malicious intent. In your example, exposing the embezzling because of an honest desire to expose the crime would not be malicious and thus not libel.
Nope, this is British libel law. The company doesn't have to prove a damn thing. *She* has to prove that they *didn't* pay her.
How about the Obamacare decision, where they initially reported it had been struck down?
That's because the second half of that sentence is effectively the important one. It's difficult to tell if a report is the facts. But it's easy to tell if it's first.
Money still fluctuates in value when you're on the gold standard. It just fluctuates in lockstep with the fluctuations in the value of gold. This means that it's unlikely to steadily decrease in value, but it doesn't mean it stops fluctuating.
*All* money fluctuates in value. Yes, even if you run on the gold standard (which I know you favor). Money that fluctuates too much isn't very good for money's intended purpose (as a means of exchange and a store of value, particularly the latter), but you can't say that something isn't money because it fluctuates. Was the Deutschmark not money during the hyperinflation of the 1920s?
That people do indeed have lots of accidents, and therefore driverless cars to not need to be perfect to be better.
Damn facts.
Ah, yes, it does.
Say what? It shows an accident rate of over 5% per year. If driverless cars have an accident rate of 3%, are they not therefore better, other things being equal? That is the OP's assertion.
Holding driverless automobiles and drivers to the same standards is "unsupported bias"? You want to run that by me again?
That's not an argument against self-driving cars, that's an argument against driver-driven cars. Don't be surprised if manually driving your car becomes illegal, at least on highways.
This would seem to imply to me that it would not be impossibly difficult to grow a new liver in a lab. All you have to do is hook into the self-regeneration properties and take advantage of them.
The really damaging part of the explosion wasn't the visible blast, but the BB shrapnel they packed in the bomb. You can't see that part directly in the video; I did notice people well away from the blast crumple and fall.
Depending on who turns out to be responsible for this, it may matter a great deal in Syria.
...film at eleven.
That's "41 megawatts" for those of you who prefer it in non-retarded units. In case you were wondering, that's 0.003% of the US's electrical generation capacity. Yeah, that's a real environmental disaster, there. It's not a problem, it's a rounding error.
...your copies of Chainmail and Outdoor Survival, every one!
Yes. As in, "If you still want these services, go buy a Wii U." I'm reminded of when Microsoft cut off the original XBox from XBox Live.