They're moving MSN Messenger exclusively to a new protocol and requiring a license for everyone else.
Can somebody point me to somewhere where a MS representative has said that a license will be required. The articles I read said that MS will assist 3rd parties to interoperate with the new protocol if there is a contractual arrangement (read NDA), but didn't mention anything about requiring a license just to use the network.
But then, I've been unable to find any MS press releases, only a couple of articles based on them.
So how many sobig.f related messages have everyone here received so far? Over the last 3 days I count in excess of 300, if you include bounces and mailing list software saying "huh?" cause it doesn't understand any of the "commands" in the message... for some reason I'm getting *many* more bounces than I am actual copies of the virus (anyone know why? Does it use a different selection method for sender addresses than target addresses?).
These mailservers would also be configured to automatically add a header for the users who don't reject the mail, maybe something like "X-Protocol: SMTP"
Something like:
Received: [...] with smtp [...]
perhaps? Don't forget that our current e-mail system started out in a multi-protocol world, so provisions for dealing with this are already in place.
I think it was sent by somebody who hopes that time travellers really do exist and are visiting this time period & have e-mail addresses & will take sympathy on him...
Kind of a long shot, but with the cost of sending spam so low, who knows?:-)
I try to keep the number of installed programs to a minimum, like say half a dozen, maybe a dozen.
Err, yeah, right. Let me count the apps that I absolutely *need* in order to do my job.
Things from your list: * SSH client. Yep, agree with that one * Web browser / email client (one program)
OK, that's two. What I also need: * Other web browsers, for compatibility testing * Graphics editor (for designing web sites) * Text editor (for editing web sites and programs) * Word processor (for writing letters & other
documentation that'll need printing) * Spreadsheet (for doing occasional organisational
tasks) * C++ compiler (for the obvious) * Java compiler (ditto) * Version control system front end * Various 'back end' admin systems for web sites
that I manage * Antivirus software (I sometimes send compiled
programs directly to clients; company policy is
scan-before-send). * CD writing software
OK, that's 13 absolute essentials. Then there are the things I'd find it hard to live without:
* File sharing client. Currently only one although in the past I've used more than one at once. * Media players. Winamp, MS media player, Real One. * Productivity utilities: file compression, a fast image viewer, a task scheduler & reminder program * Video editing & conversion software in order to be able to stick my home videos onto VCD. * Things that I'm playingwith. The odd piece of free-software-du-jour that I might find useful and have downloaded recently to see if its any good.
That makes 24. It doesn't include any of my own projects (which probably adds a further 10 separate programs to that figure at any one time).
And, I haven't had any problems with my Windows 2000 system since I installed it 9 months ago. I don't think I'm "insane". I'm just trying to use my computer as the tool that I want it to be.
he better option is not for the service to only listen to some set range of IP addresses, but just to be disabled altogether until the user makes a knowledgeable decision about what needs to be enabled.
The service (RPC) is required for many core windows features, including drag and drop of anything other than a file and many other features that require COM communication between more than one process (erm, not sure but I think VBA programs might fit into this category). I think it would _really_ confuse most people if a load of things didn't work by default.
However, I think you can assume anyone wanting to use advanced features over a LAN that isn't on 192.168.*.* has an administrator who at least either has a Microsoft certification of some form (there is one below MCSE isn't there?) or is just generally smart enough to realise that you might have to switch such features and is able to guess where one might look for the settings... anyone else is just not likely to need remote administration, distributed applications, or any of the other things that need this.
So I think the original poster was right to suggest listening only to localhost as the sensible default.
Have you actually read the articles that he links to? Do you think he actually advocates melting the north pole, or was just presenting information about the fact that it is melting?
And what have CFC's got to do with it? Admittedly, the article is talking about a very different kind of aerosols to the ones that you get deodorant in, but he never mentioned CFCs at all.
Paycheck, I have it in a 1977 Del Rey Compilation (the cover is a multi-sphered space structure, i think, it's rather worn). It's typical Dick, listed as (c)1953 Greenleaf Publications, Inc, for June 1953 Imagination, and the story reads like many other of his stories from that time period. It's witty, innovative, and, to today's audience, 100% cheesy.
I have it in one of the volumes of Dick's collected short stories. I have to admit I thought it standed out among the crowd. The story flowed better and pulled me into its world more than the average Dick story (most of which you read, sit back and let the drug-induced haze infiltrate your mind for a few minutes, and then move on to the next dose^H^H^H^Hstory... I'm thinking of one right now where God has shut down part of the world in order to make minor adjustments to it so that history flows correctly, but one of the people in it hasn't been shut down along with the rest of them, I mean what?). I thought it would eventually be made into a film. I mean, its a hell of a lot better than Second Variety (which was made into Screamers, which I still haven't seen...).
But - it is very definitely a short story. Quite a long one, I think, but that probably makes it about 1/10th the length of an average novel. Novels tend to need cutting down to make a feature film, but not by much. So I reckon this film is going to be about 70% padding... given Woo's form for such things, I think I can foresee what that will be like...
Hell, that ain't even the worst of them you've just linked to. NT4 SP4 (IIRC) broke hundreds of random applications, including Lotus Notes and Java's networking API.
A friend's laptop got infected within 30 seconds of going online yesterday morning. Twice in a row (the virus apparently doesn't check to see if its already infected the system before targetting it again).
Guess what I was doing yesterday afternoon:-(
Why is it that Windows Update can't actually give you any information about the vulnerability that the different patches fix? I had to download about 10 of them to make sure I got the right one. Why can't they say things like "This update fixes a bug in the RPC service that allows a remote attacker to gain control of your computer" rather than "An issue was found in Windows that allows a remote attacker to gain control of your computer." Really helpful.
Oh well, I guess he needed all 3.8 Mb of those patches anyway. Even if I did have to download them over a 56K modem...
"We believe the evidence will ultimately show that there was no infringement of any kind, and that the accused feature in our browser technology was developed by our own engineers based on preexisting Microsoft technology."
Isn't that irrelevant[...]?
No. The key word here that causes it to be relevant is 'preexisting' - that is they claim that they had some early version of this kind of technology working before the patent was filed, if I read the statement correctly.
OK, when I paste that URL into my browser and remove all the spaces I get this article:
From: Thomas J Cozzolino (RBNTJC@rohvm1.rohmhaas.com) Subject: Using WWW to get at Gopher (and embedded WAIS) Newsgroups: comp.infosystems.wais, comp.infosystems.gopher Date: 1993-01-20 08:52:10 PST
We have an experimental Gopher server, with the WAIS search engine embedded (Gopherd 1.1, and Boolean/substring WAIS). It works fine.
We also have WWW clients (Pei-Wei's Viola and Tony Johnson's Midas) and have written a simple HTML page to "get into" our Gopher server. We can navigate menus, etc. with no problem.
However, when do a WAIS search, we get the error:
server error: '?keyword' does not exist
Has anyone gotten a WWW browser to successfully access WAIS searches from within Gopher?
Please reply directly, if possible.
[signature cut 'cause it triggered the lameness filter]
Could somebody explain the relevance of it, 'cause I think I'm missing something. This is just about a web browser interface to gopher, which AFAICT has no bearing whatsoever on this case?
Well, it seems the parent to this post can't read a bar graph...the 7.4 gb transfer isn't total it was just the greatest amount of information transfered in an hour
I thought this as well, at first glance, but if you look carefully, each bar represents a day, not an hour... I personally wouldn't have expected a slashdotting to continue for 3 days, but there you have it...
"After all, Dave Weber's On Basilisk Station has been available for free as a "loss leader" for Baen's for-pay experiment "Webscriptions" for months now. And -- hey, whaddaya know? -- over that time it's become Baen's most popular backlist title in paper!"
While I agree with the sentiment, I have to wonder if there isn't another reason for that. It is the first book in a series which has become extremely popular over the last few years, and possibly one of the best series that Baen has published.
On the other hand, I have to agree that having heard of the series I did go straight over to Baen's site to get it, and after reading it did decide to go out of my way to get the rest of the series...
well, I can say this, I have never heard of David Weber or Lois McMaster Bujold. So take that for what it's worth.
At a guess you aren't particularly interested in the science fiction genre. Weber in particular is regarded as one of the most popular science fiction authors publishing today. I must admit to not having come across Bujold either, but for SF books to make an all-genre best seller list is a rare occurence, so I might have to wander over to baen's web site and look into it...
Oh, I'm well aware of the issues involved here. Yes, the fact that GPL code cannot be mixed with non-GPL compatible code is important to the primary function of the GPL, which is to ensure that future derivitives are also GPL.
Yes, there are GPL compatible licenses. As you say, the issue isn't "trying to force GPLness on other licenses". The essential test for GPL compatibility is: does this license allow me to take this code, strip away its current license and release a new version under the GPL. So, BSD et al are GPL compatible. A number of other licenses (I think the MPL and a lot of similar licenses) also explicitly allow relicensing to GPL in order to be compatible.
But the point is, you can take a copy of the GPL, change a very minimal number of words of the license, not affect the spirit of it in the slightest, and the result is GPL incompatible.
Say I liked the GPL in general but had issue with some of the phrasing in it. Say I took issue with section 3c, for example. This is the following section:
3. You may copy and distribute the Program (or a work based on it, under Section 2) in object code or executable form under the terms of Sections 1 and 2 above provided that you also do one of the following: [...] c) Accompany it with the information you received as to the offer to distribute corresponding source code. (This alternative is allowed only for noncommercial distribution and only if you received the program in object code or executable form with such an offer, in accord with Subsection b above.)
Now I might not want people to be able to pass responsibility for providing the source code back up the chain to me, even if they are noncommercial. I might want to force them to pass on an offer to provide the source code (or hey, even just the source code itself!) themselves. So I create a new license by taking a copy of the GPL, removing this section and changing the license's name (which is necessary to avoid confusion, as well as being simply polite...).
This license, even though it conforms pretty much exactly with the spirit of the GPL, is not GPL compatible.
Allowing redistribution under the GPL breaks the point behind making this change, because then when somebody redistributes section c can reappear, rendering the change pointless, so that method of breaking the GPL compatibility barrier is not available.
And there's not much that can be done about the situation, either. Either you get the benefits discussed above about legal cases similar to SCO's along with the other benefits of a copyleft scheme and this disadvantage, or you get neither.
Now, I'm not actually arguing that because of this the GPL is a bad thing. I am arguing, however, that stating that the GPL only adds freedom to create derivative works is wrong. In these cases, the small print taketh away...
I can make any derivative work I want of GPL'd code, and I can use it however I want. I can also distribute it to whoever I want together with the source code. The GPL does in no way limit my power of expression of derivative works, it only requires that I provide the source of them.
That's not quite true. Part of your derivitive work may also be a derivitive of some other work, which isn't available under a GPL compatible license. In this case, you _cannot_ distribute your work, and a term in the GPL is restricting from making that expression.
Of course, it is only doing this _in conjunction with_ another license that contains a similar term.
So essentially, the GPL does not by itself restrict freedom of expression of derivitive works. But take two GPL-like licenses with different phrasing and then you are restricted. Which can be a substantial PITA.
If you get a few verified reports on you (log only source and destination for a month so that it can be verified within a reasonable amount of time), you get booted for breach of contract.
As someone who runs a solicited advertising mailing list on behalf of a client I can state that being solicited (we only send to people who have signed up at the web site, we confirm addresses) and offering a working unsubscribe facility does _not_ guarantee that they won't complain about the messages anyway.
People just forget that they subscribed, never bother unsubscribing and complain for the sake of it.
Second, for thinking tasks (like coding), the fixed time means I don't stop "between thoughts" on a project. When the time is up for a task, I stop right where I am, even in mid-sentence or mid-expression
This advice is often given to writers with writing block. Listen to writers when they're talking about this - writing block is exactly what it sounds like your problem is, and writers have much more experience dealing with it than anyone else. A lot of things are suggested...
1. Set a daily target that is easy to reach. Try to break it every day; compete with yourself for how much you can break it by. 2. Have a routine. Before you start work, always do things in a particular order. So, instead of concentrating on starting to get some work done, you concentrate on going into the office, making yourself a coffee, clearing out your old work from yesterday, starting to do todays work... the routing makes it easier to just slip into working. 3. Do what the parent article suggests: stop working right in the middle of something, so when you come back to it the first thing you have to do is something particularly easy - finishing off a sentence/line of code/whatever that you started the day before and you already _know_ what you have to do. 4. Start work at the same time every day. 5. If you have a daunting project that you are putting off (I'm doing that right now...) then arrange yourself an easy step into it. No project is _entirely_ difficult. There must be something you can do easily that will be part of it: do this first. You might find the rest just flows from it. 6. Work without considering the quality of work you're producing; you can go back and fix the problems later.
If you're still stuck after trying these, there are hundreds of other things to try. Just google for 'writers block' and see if you can find anything good.
..on account of the processors not being able to get all of the hexane [3rd par] back out again [2nd par].
Not all decaf coffee is produced using hexane. In fact, a substantial amount of decaffeination uses solvents that are not considered harmful if they cannot be retrieved. Common solvents include CO2 and water.
Try to find a supplier for 'swiss water' decaffeinated coffee. It really is much better than average decaf...
But remember that whatever method used, decaf still contains a substantial amount of caffeine...
But, really there seems to be nothing people are not prepared to gamble on these days. I watched a program recently about a company the other day who took bets on whether the stock market would go up or down, same with the housing index in the UK
Its called spread betting. Its hardly new... there was a big fashion for it back in the 80's. You could win (or lose) millions, and many did.
Slashdot Mirror
They're moving MSN Messenger exclusively to a new protocol and requiring a license for everyone else .
Can somebody point me to somewhere where a MS representative has said that a license will be required. The articles I read said that MS will assist 3rd parties to interoperate with the new protocol if there is a contractual arrangement (read NDA), but didn't mention anything about requiring a license just to use the network.
But then, I've been unable to find any MS press releases, only a couple of articles based on them.
So how many sobig.f related messages have everyone here received so far? Over the last 3 days I count in excess of 300, if you include bounces and mailing list software saying "huh?" cause it doesn't understand any of the "commands" in the message... for some reason I'm getting *many* more bounces than I am actual copies of the virus (anyone know why? Does it use a different selection method for sender addresses than target addresses?).
These mailservers would also be configured to automatically add a header for the users who don't reject the mail, maybe something like "X-Protocol: SMTP"
Something like:
Received: [...] with smtp [...]
perhaps? Don't forget that our current e-mail system started out in a multi-protocol world, so provisions for dealing with this are already in place.
I think it was sent by somebody who hopes that time travellers really do exist and are visiting this time period & have e-mail addresses & will take sympathy on him...
:-)
Kind of a long shot, but with the cost of sending spam so low, who knows?
Now, taxing the upper brackets may be an important step to ending the budget woes, but that is apparently her entire economic plan.
:-)
No... there is "legalise marijuana - and tax it!". That's gotta raise a couple of million surely?
Actually, AFAICT SuSE's business model is moving towards charging for useful non-free software as add ons to their basic distro.
This probably means that if you don't actually want any of this extra stuff, their base distro + support will probably stay quite cheap.
I try to keep the number of installed programs to a minimum, like say half a dozen, maybe a dozen.
Err, yeah, right. Let me count the apps that I absolutely *need* in order to do my job.
Things from your list:
* SSH client. Yep, agree with that one
* Web browser / email client (one program)
OK, that's two. What I also need:
* Other web browsers, for compatibility testing
* Graphics editor (for designing web sites)
* Text editor (for editing web sites and programs)
* Word processor (for writing letters & other
documentation that'll need printing)
* Spreadsheet (for doing occasional organisational
tasks)
* C++ compiler (for the obvious)
* Java compiler (ditto)
* Version control system front end
* Various 'back end' admin systems for web sites
that I manage
* Antivirus software (I sometimes send compiled
programs directly to clients; company policy is
scan-before-send).
* CD writing software
OK, that's 13 absolute essentials. Then there are the things I'd find it hard to live without:
* File sharing client. Currently only one although in the past I've used more than one at once.
* Media players. Winamp, MS media player, Real One.
* Productivity utilities: file compression, a fast image viewer, a task scheduler & reminder program
* Video editing & conversion software in order to be able to stick my home videos onto VCD.
* Things that I'm playing with. The odd piece of free-software-du-jour that I might find useful and have downloaded recently to see if its any good.
That makes 24. It doesn't include any of my own projects (which probably adds a further 10 separate programs to that figure at any one time).
And, I haven't had any problems with my Windows 2000 system since I installed it 9 months ago. I don't think I'm "insane". I'm just trying to use my computer as the tool that I want it to be.
he better option is not for the service to only listen to some set range of IP addresses, but just to be disabled altogether until the user makes a knowledgeable decision about what needs to be enabled.
The service (RPC) is required for many core windows features, including drag and drop of anything other than a file and many other features that require COM communication between more than one process (erm, not sure but I think VBA programs might fit into this category). I think it would _really_ confuse most people if a load of things didn't work by default.
However, I think you can assume anyone wanting to use advanced features over a LAN that isn't on 192.168.*.* has an administrator who at least either has a Microsoft certification of some form (there is one below MCSE isn't there?) or is just generally smart enough to realise that you might have to switch such features and is able to guess where one might look for the settings... anyone else is just not likely to need remote administration, distributed applications, or any of the other things that need this.
So I think the original poster was right to suggest listening only to localhost as the sensible default.
Have you actually read the articles that he links to? Do you think he actually advocates melting the north pole, or was just presenting information about the fact that it is melting?
And what have CFC's got to do with it? Admittedly, the article is talking about a very different kind of aerosols to the ones that you get deodorant in, but he never mentioned CFCs at all.
Read before you flame.
Paycheck, I have it in a 1977 Del Rey Compilation (the cover is a multi-sphered space structure, i think, it's rather worn). It's typical Dick, listed as (c)1953 Greenleaf Publications, Inc, for June 1953 Imagination, and the story reads like many other of his stories from that time period. It's witty, innovative, and, to today's audience, 100% cheesy.
I have it in one of the volumes of Dick's collected short stories. I have to admit I thought it standed out among the crowd. The story flowed better and pulled me into its world more than the average Dick story (most of which you read, sit back and let the drug-induced haze infiltrate your mind for a few minutes, and then move on to the next dose^H^H^H^Hstory... I'm thinking of one right now where God has shut down part of the world in order to make minor adjustments to it so that history flows correctly, but one of the people in it hasn't been shut down along with the rest of them, I mean what?). I thought it would eventually be made into a film. I mean, its a hell of a lot better than Second Variety (which was made into Screamers, which I still haven't seen...).
But - it is very definitely a short story. Quite a long one, I think, but that probably makes it about 1/10th the length of an average novel. Novels tend to need cutting down to make a feature film, but not by much. So I reckon this film is going to be about 70% padding... given Woo's form for such things, I think I can foresee what that will be like...
Hell, that ain't even the worst of them you've just linked to. NT4 SP4 (IIRC) broke hundreds of random applications, including Lotus Notes and Java's networking API.
A friend's laptop got infected within 30 seconds of going online yesterday morning. Twice in a row (the virus apparently doesn't check to see if its already infected the system before targetting it again).
:-(
Guess what I was doing yesterday afternoon
Why is it that Windows Update can't actually give you any information about the vulnerability that the different patches fix? I had to download about 10 of them to make sure I got the right one. Why can't they say things like "This update fixes a bug in the RPC service that allows a remote attacker to gain control of your computer" rather than "An issue was found in Windows that allows a remote attacker to gain control of your computer." Really helpful.
Oh well, I guess he needed all 3.8 Mb of those patches anyway. Even if I did have to download them over a 56K modem...
In what way? I don't have a gopher / WAIS server hanging around to try what was described in the original post. What is special about this?
"We believe the evidence will ultimately show that there was no infringement of any kind, and that the accused feature in our browser technology was developed by our own engineers based on preexisting Microsoft technology."
Isn't that irrelevant[...]?
No. The key word here that causes it to be relevant is 'preexisting' - that is they claim that they had some early version of this kind of technology working before the patent was filed, if I read the statement correctly.
OK, when I paste that URL into my browser and remove all the spaces I get this article:
.Links file has:
From: Thomas J Cozzolino (RBNTJC@rohvm1.rohmhaas.com)
Subject: Using WWW to get at Gopher (and embedded WAIS)
Newsgroups: comp.infosystems.wais, comp.infosystems.gopher
Date: 1993-01-20 08:52:10 PST
We have an experimental Gopher server, with the WAIS search engine
embedded (Gopherd 1.1, and Boolean/substring WAIS). It works fine.
We also have WWW clients (Pei-Wei's Viola and Tony Johnson's Midas) and
have written a simple HTML page to "get into" our Gopher server. We can
navigate menus, etc. with no problem.
However, when do a WAIS search, we get the error:
server error: '?keyword' does not exist
My
Type=7
Host=myhost
Port=70
Path=7/directoryname/index
Has anyone gotten a WWW browser to successfully access WAIS searches from
within Gopher?
Please reply directly, if possible.
[signature cut 'cause it triggered the lameness filter]
Could somebody explain the relevance of it, 'cause I think I'm missing something. This is just about a web browser interface to gopher, which AFAICT has no bearing whatsoever on this case?
Well, it seems the parent to this post can't read a bar graph...the 7.4 gb transfer isn't total it was just the greatest amount of information transfered in an hour
I thought this as well, at first glance, but if you look carefully, each bar represents a day, not an hour... I personally wouldn't have expected a slashdotting to continue for 3 days, but there you have it...
"After all, Dave Weber's On Basilisk Station has been available for free as a "loss leader" for Baen's for-pay experiment "Webscriptions" for months now. And -- hey, whaddaya know? -- over that time it's become Baen's most popular backlist title in paper!"
While I agree with the sentiment, I have to wonder if there isn't another reason for that. It is the first book in a series which has become extremely popular over the last few years, and possibly one of the best series that Baen has published.
On the other hand, I have to agree that having heard of the series I did go straight over to Baen's site to get it, and after reading it did decide to go out of my way to get the rest of the series...
well, I can say this, I have never heard of David Weber or Lois McMaster Bujold. So take that for what it's worth.
At a guess you aren't particularly interested in the science fiction genre. Weber in particular is regarded as one of the most popular science fiction authors publishing today. I must admit to not having come across Bujold either, but for SF books to make an all-genre best seller list is a rare occurence, so I might have to wander over to baen's web site and look into it...
There is a very important difference between getting a book for free from the library and downloading a copy.
The author gets paid for the former (in many countries), but not the latter.
Do a lookup on "public lending right payments" some time.
Oh, I'm well aware of the issues involved here. Yes, the fact that GPL code cannot be mixed with non-GPL compatible code is important to the primary function of the GPL, which is to ensure that future derivitives are also GPL.
Yes, there are GPL compatible licenses. As you say, the issue isn't "trying to force GPLness on other licenses". The essential test for GPL compatibility is: does this license allow me to take this code, strip away its current license and release a new version under the GPL. So, BSD et al are GPL compatible. A number of other licenses (I think the MPL and a lot of similar licenses) also explicitly allow relicensing to GPL in order to be compatible.
But the point is, you can take a copy of the GPL, change a very minimal number of words of the license, not affect the spirit of it in the slightest, and the result is GPL incompatible.
Say I liked the GPL in general but had issue with some of the phrasing in it. Say I took issue with section 3c, for example. This is the following section:
3. You may copy and distribute the Program (or a work based on it, under Section 2) in object code or executable form under the terms of Sections 1 and 2 above provided that you also do one of the following:
[...]
c) Accompany it with the information you received as to the offer to distribute corresponding source code. (This alternative is allowed only for noncommercial distribution and only if you received the program in object code or executable form with such an offer, in accord with Subsection b above.)
Now I might not want people to be able to pass responsibility for providing the source code back up the chain to me, even if they are noncommercial. I might want to force them to pass on an offer to provide the source code (or hey, even just the source code itself!) themselves. So I create a new license by taking a copy of the GPL, removing this section and changing the license's name (which is necessary to avoid confusion, as well as being simply polite...).
This license, even though it conforms pretty much exactly with the spirit of the GPL, is not GPL compatible.
Allowing redistribution under the GPL breaks the point behind making this change, because then when somebody redistributes section c can reappear, rendering the change pointless, so that method of breaking the GPL compatibility barrier is not available.
And there's not much that can be done about the situation, either. Either you get the benefits discussed above about legal cases similar to SCO's along with the other benefits of a copyleft scheme and this disadvantage, or you get neither.
Now, I'm not actually arguing that because of this the GPL is a bad thing. I am arguing, however, that stating that the GPL only adds freedom to create derivative works is wrong. In these cases, the small print taketh away...
I can make any derivative work I want of GPL'd code, and I can use it however I want. I can also distribute it to whoever I want together with the source code. The GPL does in no way limit my power of expression of derivative works, it only requires that I provide the source of them.
That's not quite true. Part of your derivitive work may also be a derivitive of some other work, which isn't available under a GPL compatible license. In this case, you _cannot_ distribute your work, and a term in the GPL is restricting from making that expression.
Of course, it is only doing this _in conjunction with_ another license that contains a similar term.
So essentially, the GPL does not by itself restrict freedom of expression of derivitive works. But take two GPL-like licenses with different phrasing and then you are restricted. Which can be a substantial PITA.
If you get a few verified reports on you (log only source and destination for a month so that it can be verified within a reasonable amount of time), you get booted for breach of contract.
As someone who runs a solicited advertising mailing list on behalf of a client I can state that being solicited (we only send to people who have signed up at the web site, we confirm addresses) and offering a working unsubscribe facility does _not_ guarantee that they won't complain about the messages anyway.
People just forget that they subscribed, never bother unsubscribing and complain for the sake of it.
Second, for thinking tasks (like coding), the fixed time means I don't stop "between thoughts" on a project. When the time is up for a task, I stop right where I am, even in mid-sentence or mid-expression
This advice is often given to writers with writing block. Listen to writers when they're talking about this - writing block is exactly what it sounds like your problem is, and writers have much more experience dealing with it than anyone else. A lot of things are suggested...
1. Set a daily target that is easy to reach. Try to break it every day; compete with yourself for how much you can break it by.
2. Have a routine. Before you start work, always do things in a particular order. So, instead of concentrating on starting to get some work done, you concentrate on going into the office, making yourself a coffee, clearing out your old work from yesterday, starting to do todays work... the routing makes it easier to just slip into working.
3. Do what the parent article suggests: stop working right in the middle of something, so when you come back to it the first thing you have to do is something particularly easy - finishing off a sentence/line of code/whatever that you started the day before and you already _know_ what you have to do.
4. Start work at the same time every day.
5. If you have a daunting project that you are putting off (I'm doing that right now...) then arrange yourself an easy step into it. No project is _entirely_ difficult. There must be something you can do easily that will be part of it: do this first. You might find the rest just flows from it.
6. Work without considering the quality of work you're producing; you can go back and fix the problems later.
If you're still stuck after trying these, there are hundreds of other things to try. Just google for 'writers block' and see if you can find anything good.
..on account of the processors not being able to get all of the hexane [3rd par] back out again [2nd par].
Not all decaf coffee is produced using hexane. In fact, a substantial amount of decaffeination uses solvents that are not considered harmful if they cannot be retrieved. Common solvents include CO2 and water.
Try to find a supplier for 'swiss water' decaffeinated coffee. It really is much better than average decaf...
But remember that whatever method used, decaf still contains a substantial amount of caffeine...
But, really there seems to be nothing people are not prepared to gamble on these days. I watched a program recently about a company the other day who took bets on whether the stock market would go up or down, same with the housing index in the UK
Its called spread betting. Its hardly new... there was a big fashion for it back in the 80's. You could win (or lose) millions, and many did.