Not only does it report the weight of my cat's droppings, but it reports the duration and total cat weight. It also generates amusing facts about Nibbler's pooping habits.
I have some basic build instructions available. I use Bluetooth, Arduino, Raspberry Pi, load cells, and an external ADC.
Here's another (real-life) scenario:
Some time ago, I released a "Glide wrapper" under the LGPL. Glide is a proprietary 3D API created by 3dfx--my wrapper exposed the same entry points, but converted them to equivalent Direct3D calls.
Now presumably, I could have released my wrapper under the standard GPL. However, there are all these games still around that can link with my library. Obviously, it's absurd to think they need to rerelease under the GPL, just because they have the potential to link with my "implementation" of Glide, but from how I read the GPL, that's what needs to happen. So, either the GPL is broken, or it's illegal for me to license my wrapper with the GPL. The latter seems more likely, but where does that leave other library developers?
If the GPL *is* broken in this fashion, it brings up another possibility for Vidomi: to release *two* DLLs, each exposing the same pseudo-standardized interface (which would include entry points for resizing, cropping, etc.). One DLL would be developed in-house, and would just implement the functionality at the most basic (slow, buggy, but quickly developed) level. The other DLL would use the GPL code from VirtualDub and others, and would presumably do everything with much higher quality.
Now, it seems that you would be hard-pressed to fault Vidomi on this, since their package would be completely usable without the GPL code. However, most everyone would download the "enhanced" DLL, just because it would be so much better.
Of course, if it is indeed illegal to license with the GPL in this case, then the whole idea is moot.
Slashdot Mirror
Check out the Twitter feed here.
Not only does it report the weight of my cat's droppings, but it reports the duration and total cat weight. It also generates amusing facts about Nibbler's pooping habits.
I have some basic build instructions available. I use Bluetooth, Arduino, Raspberry Pi, load cells, and an external ADC.
Here's another (real-life) scenario:
Some time ago, I released a "Glide wrapper" under the LGPL. Glide is a proprietary 3D API created by 3dfx--my wrapper exposed the same entry points, but converted them to equivalent Direct3D calls.
Now presumably, I could have released my wrapper under the standard GPL. However, there are all these games still around that can link with my library. Obviously, it's absurd to think they need to rerelease under the GPL, just because they have the potential to link with my "implementation" of Glide, but from how I read the GPL, that's what needs to happen. So, either the GPL is broken, or it's illegal for me to license my wrapper with the GPL. The latter seems more likely, but where does that leave other library developers?
If the GPL *is* broken in this fashion, it brings up another possibility for Vidomi: to release *two* DLLs, each exposing the same pseudo-standardized interface (which would include entry points for resizing, cropping, etc.). One DLL would be developed in-house, and would just implement the functionality at the most basic (slow, buggy, but quickly developed) level. The other DLL would use the GPL code from VirtualDub and others, and would presumably do everything with much higher quality.
Now, it seems that you would be hard-pressed to fault Vidomi on this, since their package would be completely usable without the GPL code. However, most everyone would download the "enhanced" DLL, just because it would be so much better.
Of course, if it is indeed illegal to license with the GPL in this case, then the whole idea is moot.
-Scott