The Apache License is a free software license authored by the Apache Software Foundation (ASF). The Apache License requires preservation of the copyright notice and disclaimer, but it is not a copyleft license — it allows use of the source code for the development of proprietary software as well as free and open source software.
I believe they've accepted contributions to the pre-honeycomb code, meaning they do not own the entire copyright and therefore must obey the restrictions of the license if they use those outside contributions.
At least their identity would be kept secret if they release it to Wikileaks. Until another Wikileaks employee decides to leak that. And the circle of leaks continues...
While that makes perfect sense, you still can't deny that the whole idea of a "leak" is to expose information that someone wants secret. So it's a mind-bender to think that in order to promote "good" leaks (exposing scandals, scams, etc) Wikileaks must suppress "bad" leaks (info on who leaked). Us sheeple like things simple, so "Wikileaks loves leaks" works for us until we realize that Wikileaks does not, in fact, support all kinds of leaks.
Yes, the rest is under the Apache Licence 2.0 which apparently allows proprietary modification. Thus we see (yet again) that RMS was right, even though he sounds like an old cook.
By not releasing this to the general public, Google has tight control over releases and android tablet, and that way can exercise a form of money grubbing they otherwise couldn't.
FTFY. I'm typically a Google fanboy, but this move seems to be specifically so that "only approved partners" (that fork over the dough) can have honeycomb. Google certainly deserves to make money off of Honeycomb, but closing off the source is not the best plan.
Saying stuff like "aid corporations" is baiting/. to hate, but it sounds like this will help thwart domain squatter/trolls, which/. is supposed to hate even more.
I am *so* tired of seeing the "1 weird old tip for a flat belly" ad. Not only am I uninterested in losing weight, but this particular tactic loses its potency when I see the exact same phrase over and over.
In (conspiracy theory) reality, Sony is secretly behind Anonymous. They are just playing a game of cat and mouse with themselves now to confuse everyone. Because really Microsoft secretly owns Sony and is trying to make itself look better by throwing Sony's reputation in the toilet. But then they realized that they can still make tons of money off of Sony products anyways.
At some point you do need things to be performed in sequence. Performing a bajillion parallel operations can only get you so far. Can the simple tasks required of a smartphone (e.g. AngryBirds) really benefit from that many cores?
I believe the argument is more correctly paraphrased, "it makes no sense to distinguish between smartphone traffic and traffic from devices tethered to a smartphone". Any computing device has the same potential to behave badly with the network.
Slashdot Mirror
Sorry, but you were expected to die 1 - 4 years ago.
Where are my mod points when I need them? Very, very true.
My sarcasm detector is indecisive on this one.
The Apache License is a free software license authored by the Apache Software Foundation (ASF). The Apache License requires preservation of the copyright notice and disclaimer, but it is not a copyleft license — it allows use of the source code for the development of proprietary software as well as free and open source software.
Apache License (emphasis mine)
I believe they've accepted contributions to the pre-honeycomb code, meaning they do not own the entire copyright and therefore must obey the restrictions of the license if they use those outside contributions.
At least their identity would be kept secret if they release it to Wikileaks. Until another Wikileaks employee decides to leak that. And the circle of leaks continues...
While that makes perfect sense, you still can't deny that the whole idea of a "leak" is to expose information that someone wants secret. So it's a mind-bender to think that in order to promote "good" leaks (exposing scandals, scams, etc) Wikileaks must suppress "bad" leaks (info on who leaked). Us sheeple like things simple, so "Wikileaks loves leaks" works for us until we realize that Wikileaks does not, in fact, support all kinds of leaks.
Did I miss the part in TFA where they said there was a 100mb cap? [citation needed]
Is there any exiting MMO that isn't "leveraging the internet"?
Yes, the rest is under the Apache Licence 2.0 which apparently allows proprietary modification. Thus we see (yet again) that RMS was right, even though he sounds like an old cook.
This honeycomb-flavored one is rock-solid! I can only lick the outside...can't get to the gooey honey goodness inside...
By not releasing this to the general public, Google has tight control over releases and android tablet, and that way can exercise a form of money grubbing they otherwise couldn't.
FTFY. I'm typically a Google fanboy, but this move seems to be specifically so that "only approved partners" (that fork over the dough) can have honeycomb. Google certainly deserves to make money off of Honeycomb, but closing off the source is not the best plan.
RIAA sues Google in 5...4...3...
Saying stuff like "aid corporations" is baiting /. to hate, but it sounds like this will help thwart domain squatter/trolls, which /. is supposed to hate even more.
I am *so* tired of seeing the "1 weird old tip for a flat belly" ad. Not only am I uninterested in losing weight, but this particular tactic loses its potency when I see the exact same phrase over and over.
Therefore, we should call them GNU/Linux. Thanks, RMS.
If I had to choose which to pay more, I'd choose the doctor, hands down.
Because democrat policemen never interrogate?
Microsoft's Internet Explorer browser let me actually download the executable.
Excuse me, sir, I believe you are at the wrong website. All legitimate nerds hate IE.
In (conspiracy theory) reality, Sony is secretly behind Anonymous. They are just playing a game of cat and mouse with themselves now to confuse everyone. Because really Microsoft secretly owns Sony and is trying to make itself look better by throwing Sony's reputation in the toilet. But then they realized that they can still make tons of money off of Sony products anyways.
Scratch
it's Anonymous's fault! Hacking poor Sony's vulnerable servers...the gall! [/sarcasm]
At some point you do need things to be performed in sequence. Performing a bajillion parallel operations can only get you so far. Can the simple tasks required of a smartphone (e.g. AngryBirds) really benefit from that many cores?
Ubuntu is moving in a direction where it no longer is that distro.
And which one is "that distro" now?
I believe the argument is more correctly paraphrased, "it makes no sense to distinguish between smartphone traffic and traffic from devices tethered to a smartphone". Any computing device has the same potential to behave badly with the network.