But the thing is, we don't want to have unpredictable UIs at the whim of the browser designer -- we want our web app to behave the same on every browser.
That's stupid. If you don't want to make use of these 'unpredictable' browser UI features, then simply don't use the link elements, but don't try and screw it up for those who do want to use thes features.
No, under the GPL you must release source code along with any changes. There's nothing in there requiring you to make your changes public.
Even that isn't correct. There is no compulsion to automatically release source code along, you only have to offer to release the source to anybody you distribute binaries too (and follow through on that offer if and only if someone requests the source).
However it is normal to make source freely and immediatly available just to cut the administrative overhead of fulfilling your obligations under GPL at a later date.
Because a higher speed limit would imply to drivers that it is safe to travel at those speeds continuously (under normal road conditions).
That may not be the case.
However there may be times when it is desirable to exceed the speed limit to some degree (as an emergency manouver for example) and no automated unit should be able to take that ability from a driver.
Don't enforce speed limits exactly, but limit how much you can break them by.
That doesn't seem too unreasonable to me if they choose a margin that gives some lee-way that would give the driver some power.
Of course, then if the driver were to continuously use that leeway they'd find themselves without any leeway left if they needed it in an emergency.......
How vehicle location works. It requires a secondary communications network to actually send the GPS data back to be monitored. GPS alone does not do this.
As I understand it a GPS unit works out where it is from signals it receives, not emits.
If all the mapping/speedlimit information is stored in the unit then the unit would have no reason to 'dial-out' and allow you to be tracked.
That doesn't mean it won't happen, but it isn't a requirement of using this technology (to the best of my knowledge).
With "Kiss this" written on the back.
When I was at uni in England the T.V. Licensing Board kept sending me nasty letters telling me to buy a T.V. License, despite the fact we already had one for the address. Eventually we got such a photo (which a friend had kindly left on a housemates camera that was laying around during a house party) and sent it to them in their reply paid envelope.
Hehehe, it's not even "GNU/Linux (often called 'Linux')" anymore.
You will be assimilated!
(I'm just having a bit of lighthearted fun, to be honest I don't really care what any one calls it.)
Is there a patch to make it play discs crippled by CSS? I've been using Oms from the LiVid people so far. I get reasonable results (PIII-600, TNT2). I would like to compare it to Xine, but the only things I seem to be able to play with Xine out of the box are VideoCDs.
I think Netscape would have done themselves many favours if they had made their first release browser only (no Mail/News or Composer, maybe AIM).
The browser with it's new rendering engine is the sexy part of the product, the bit that people are interested in playing with. If they could have omitted Mail/News and composer for the first release they'd have a smaller, lighter package, with less to QA that people would be happy to use as a browser.
If you want to develope close source applications using QT you can buy a different license from them and do that.
Indeed. However, I wouldn't be basing my business with QT technology as the cornerstone with the possibility that they will greatly increase licence fees if QT gains dominance.
There is no problem here except when people want Free Software but are not willing to make their own software free.
What of people that merely want to make Open Source software? With QT it's GPL or proprietary, with no room for middle ground (if you want to be able to distribute binaries, which is kind of useful).
I do wish the Windows version of QT was GPL because then I would use it in a GPL program I'm writing for both Windows and Linux
Indeed, such complex licencing situations on a widget set are just stupid. What is the point of a cross-platform widget set if you can't deploy things cross-platform with ease? There's just too many hurdles and restrictions for something that is so central to an application. I'd be most dissappointed if The Gimp for Windows didn't exist because of a licencing restriction on the widget set.
Is your problem with 'comercial software' or 'closed source' (or perhaps 'non-Free')?
As commercial software Opera has remained tightly focused on Open standards and providing the best interface for a certain segment of users. It has had to do this to make money in a competative market. It isn't a browser for everyone and nor should it be, for that way lies bloat.
Don't get me wrong. I like Open Source software. I download almost every stable nightly of Mozilla, file bugs, help with test cases etc.
But I don't see commercial/closed source software as being inherantly evil either. Particularly with a company like Opera which has always put security, privacy and support for open standards to the fore.
Red Hat & Gnome are sacrificing their ideals for the sake of a quick buck. You can't get into bed with the Commercial Devil and not die a little.
You still seem to be under the impression that 'Free' and 'Commercial' are two incompatible concepts. Have you not been paying attention?
Part of the reason that the big commercial companies were attracted to the GNOME Foundation was the Freedom provided by GNOME's underlying widget set, GTK+. A Freedom which wasn't available from QT at the time
If you want to talk about Open Source for a second then QT is incompatible with the majority of Open Source licences as it is GPL, rather than LGPL.
If the FSF acknowledged the need for the LGPL and created it then why don't Trolltech use it for their QT libraries? The reason is simple, Trolltech's goal was to silence the most vocal (and extreme) Open Source type (ie Free Software proponents) while maintaing the same degree of usage control over their libraries. Any company planning on releasing non-GPL (ie proprietary or an alternative Open Source licence) would be insane to tie themselves to the future licencing whims of Trolltech.
So if someone has tetrachromatic cones in their eyes, and that person's mother didn't have it (from the article, all tetrachromatics are female), then that person would be a mutant. If the mother was a tetrachromatic, then that person would not be a mutant.
Surely it comes down to genetics, not whether a particular attribute physically manifests itself in her parents.
If her genetic sequence is directly derived from her parents then she isn't a mutant, even though she exhibits an attribute that neither of her parents had as individuals.
For someone to be a mutant, their genetic make up must be somehow altered from what we would expect it to be.
20 Gigabits per second, apparently.
Your original post here seems to have been wide of the mark. Australia HAS had a fat pipe linking to Asia without going via the US. Not only that, but it was the countries biggest international pipe and accounted for the majority of our biggest telcos international traffic. It's been overtaken in size (considerably) by the new Southern Cross cable, but it's still there (when it's up).
I don't know about your car, but mine is perfectly capable of sitting in it's garage without me in it. In fact, it does just this for approximatly 12 hours a day, more than enough time to keep my mp3 collection in sync.
I want a car MP3 player with wireless ethernet that will sync it's MP3 collection with my home (and office for that matter) computer whenever it's in range. No manual labour at all, just a no-hassle, up to date collection of the music I own in the three places I spend the most time (home/car/office).
Slashdot Mirror
However it is normal to make source freely and immediatly available just to cut the administrative overhead of fulfilling your obligations under GPL at a later date.
Because a higher speed limit would imply to drivers that it is safe to travel at those speeds continuously (under normal road conditions).
That may not be the case.
However there may be times when it is desirable to exceed the speed limit to some degree (as an emergency manouver for example) and no automated unit should be able to take that ability from a driver.
Don't enforce speed limits exactly, but limit how much you can break them by.
That doesn't seem too unreasonable to me if they choose a margin that gives some lee-way that would give the driver some power.
Of course, then if the driver were to continuously use that leeway they'd find themselves without any leeway left if they needed it in an emergency.......
How vehicle location works. It requires a secondary communications network to actually send the GPS data back to be monitored. GPS alone does not do this.
As I understand it a GPS unit works out where it is from signals it receives, not emits.
If all the mapping/speedlimit information is stored in the unit then the unit would have no reason to 'dial-out' and allow you to be tracked.
That doesn't mean it won't happen, but it isn't a requirement of using this technology (to the best of my knowledge).
Largely because of the quantity of dickheads who'd all be competing for the "Last Post".
In modern versions of (stable) GNOME the toolbar is ultra-configurable. It can be a tiny 12 pixels if you so desire.
With "Kiss this" written on the back.
When I was at uni in England the T.V. Licensing Board kept sending me nasty letters telling me to buy a T.V. License, despite the fact we already had one for the address. Eventually we got such a photo (which a friend had kindly left on a housemates camera that was laying around during a house party) and sent it to them in their reply paid envelope.
Hehehe, it's not even "GNU/Linux (often called 'Linux')" anymore.
You will be assimilated!
(I'm just having a bit of lighthearted fun, to be honest I don't really care what any one calls it.)
Is there a patch to make it play discs crippled by CSS? I've been using Oms from the LiVid people so far. I get reasonable results (PIII-600, TNT2). I would like to compare it to Xine, but the only things I seem to be able to play with Xine out of the box are VideoCDs.
I think Netscape would have done themselves many favours if they had made their first release browser only (no Mail/News or Composer, maybe AIM).
The browser with it's new rendering engine is the sexy part of the product, the bit that people are interested in playing with. If they could have omitted Mail/News and composer for the first release they'd have a smaller, lighter package, with less to QA that people would be happy to use as a browser.
Accurate benchmarks? Do such things exist ;)
here (Mozilla screwed that up, not me. Honestly!)
In related news it seems that the WaSP have changed their minds about Netscape 6.
Is your problem with 'comercial software' or 'closed source' (or perhaps 'non-Free')?
As commercial software Opera has remained tightly focused on Open standards and providing the best interface for a certain segment of users. It has had to do this to make money in a competative market. It isn't a browser for everyone and nor should it be, for that way lies bloat.
Don't get me wrong. I like Open Source software. I download almost every stable nightly of Mozilla, file bugs, help with test cases etc.
But I don't see commercial/closed source software as being inherantly evil either. Particularly with a company like Opera which has always put security, privacy and support for open standards to the fore.
If moderation had occured, you'd see the reasons next to the score. The score came from the karma he has managed to obtain so far.
Part of the reason that the big commercial companies were attracted to the GNOME Foundation was the Freedom provided by GNOME's underlying widget set, GTK+. A Freedom which wasn't available from QT at the time
If you want to talk about Open Source for a second then QT is incompatible with the majority of Open Source licences as it is GPL, rather than LGPL.
If the FSF acknowledged the need for the LGPL and created it then why don't Trolltech use it for their QT libraries? The reason is simple, Trolltech's goal was to silence the most vocal (and extreme) Open Source type (ie Free Software proponents) while maintaing the same degree of usage control over their libraries. Any company planning on releasing non-GPL (ie proprietary or an alternative Open Source licence) would be insane to tie themselves to the future licencing whims of Trolltech.
If her genetic sequence is directly derived from her parents then she isn't a mutant, even though she exhibits an attribute that neither of her parents had as individuals.
For someone to be a mutant, their genetic make up must be somehow altered from what we would expect it to be.
Probably
20 Gigabits per second, apparently. Your original post here seems to have been wide of the mark. Australia HAS had a fat pipe linking to Asia without going via the US. Not only that, but it was the countries biggest international pipe and accounted for the majority of our biggest telcos international traffic. It's been overtaken in size (considerably) by the new Southern Cross cable, but it's still there (when it's up).
I don't know about your car, but mine is perfectly capable of sitting in it's garage without me in it. In fact, it does just this for approximatly 12 hours a day, more than enough time to keep my mp3 collection in sync.
I want a car MP3 player with wireless ethernet that will sync it's MP3 collection with my home (and office for that matter) computer whenever it's in range. No manual labour at all, just a no-hassle, up to date collection of the music I own in the three places I spend the most time (home/car/office).
You mean the "nonstandard proprietary HTML qualifier" onload as documented in the html specs?
You'd have seen that when Stallman behaves like Stallman he gets villified on Slashdot too so there's no great irony here at all.