It's not the "Patriot Act", nor is it the "US Patriot Act"; it's the "USAPATRIOT" Act. Please use the full name. The "USAPATRIOT" Act has nothing to do with patriotism, so calling it the "Patriot Act" or "US Patriot Act" is misleading. Personally, I pronounce it "the you sap at riot act" to avoid confusion.
It's not the "U.S. Patriot" Act (nor is it just the "Patriot" Act, as the blurb states); it's the "USAPATRIOT" Act. Please use the full name. The "USAPATRIOT" Act has nothing to do with patriotism, so calling it the "Patriot Act" or "U.S. Patriot Act" is misleading. Personally, I pronounce it "the you sap at riot act" to avoid confusion.
2. A router used in woodworking is always pronounced "rowter", because it comes from the word "rout", which is always pronounced "rowt". However, "router" as used in computers is derived from "route", which can be pronounced "root" or "rowt", depending on what part of the country you are from (e.g., near "route 66"), your upbringing, etc. Therefore, "router" can be pronounced either "rowter" or "rooter". Since I am partially schizoid, I pronounce route "root", and router "rowter".
Hah! My first computer game was a version of Star Trek, written in some form of BASIC on a PDP-10, played on an ASR-33 teletype. That's right, every time you wanted a map of the sector, it was printed out on a piece of paper at ten characters/second.
My first real-time interactive game was called Orbit. It was written by a friend of mine and myself in FORTRAN for a PDP-11 with a Tektronix 4010 display. It used the front-panel switches of the computer to control the spaceships. It was similar to Asteroids without the asteroids, but the ships could fire missles, lay mines, and dock with each other, there was a planet in the middle of the screen that you could land on and that would extert a gravitational influence on everything (ships, mines, and missiles), and locational/fuel guages on the sides so that you could navigate back to the screen (none of this wimpy wrap-around universe stuff). I tried writing a 3D "FPS" version of it, but the computer was 'way too slow to do anything 3D in real-time.
The department (SUNY/AB EE) banned the game from the machine when they had to replace the front panel switches, and when they learned that the graduate students who were supposed to be using the machine for their projects were instead wasting their time playing Orbit.
Which is why I wrote "outgassing". While I wrote the post as a joke, here is how I envision the explosion could take place:
Outgassing gasoline vapor ignites from coming in contact with the hot model helicopter engine.
The explosion procedes along a gas 'trail" to the drum opening.
The explosion near the opening rips the opening wider, and/or maybe creates new openings nearby.
Turbulence and high pressure from the explosion forces atmospheric oxygen through the opening(s) into the drum.
The explosion continues into the drum.
The gasoline vapor/oxygen mixture inside of the drum ignites, blowing the drum apart and turning much of the remaining gasoline into an aerosol, which quickly vaporizes, mixes with the surrounding atmosphere, and ignites.
Yes, they did. Remember the Titanic? The Germans tried to make it look like it had struck an iceburg, but they didn't fool President Lincoln! Oh, no, he knew what those Krauts were up to, because of the spy satellites. (How can a blimp strike an iceburg, anyway?) Hitler also attacked the US personally by selling counterfeit copies of Windows XP to the Justice Department, and writing "Mein Kampf", where he stated, "the only good Indianian is a dead Indianian", which is a direct ripoff of Yogi Berra, and an insult to Daytona 500 fans everywhere. There is also evidence (albeit unconfirmed) that his V-2 rocket program, after several revisions, would have evolved into a program to stock American grocery shelves with bad-tasting carrot juice.
So don't tell me that the Germans never attacked us.
1. Robotic helicopter with a very hot engine and a straw sticking out the bottom. 2. 55-Gallon drum of gasoline outgassing from a hole where the straw goes in. 3. (In the words of that "Dances with Wolves" guy from "The Red Green Show") BOOOOM!
When Fox was first starting out, they took a lot of chances, and the result was great shows like BCjr. Unfortunately, now that they are "established", they have become as entrenched in the mainstream as the other three major networks, and for the most part are afraid to try anything new or innovative.
leaving those of us with more than 2 braincells with nothing worth watching."
Try the Sci-Fi channel (except for "Crossing Over" and the UFO conspiracy shows). "Stargate SG-1" is pretty good. "Stargate Atlantis" is too new to judge yet. "Twilight Zone" reruns abound.
Also, USA (or BBCA, I forget which) is doing reruns of "The Prisoner". Speaking of BBCA, "Black Adder", "The Thin Blue Line", and "Monty Python's Flying Circus" are all in reruns.
Star Trek reruns from the various series are playing on SpikeTV and elsewhere.
And don't forget "The Simpsons" on Fox.
Finally, "Question Time" on C-SPAN (where Tony Blair and his adversaries trade verbal abuse) is pretty amusing. (I'd like to see GWB in a similar situation. It would be hilarious.)
If all you have is broadcast TV, then I'm afraid that you're pretty much limited to "The Simpsons" and "The McNeil/Lehrer Report" (or whatever its called these days).
if the macaque spreads the knowledge of how to walk on two legs permanently by teaching its young or other apes
My guess is no. Non-human primates of various kinds have been raised by (presumably exclusively bipedal) humans for many years now. One would think that if this were a normally-learnable trait, then at least one of these primates would have done it already.
It would have been nice if one of you advocates had provided a link. It would also have been nice if one of you had mentioned that it is a commercial product, so that I wouldn't have had to waste my time Googling for nothing.
the fsf states that since not everyone has internet access, you are supposed to comply with a demand for physical media.
IANAL, but the GPL and the FAQ to which you pointed seem to indicate that distribution of the source over the Internet is sufficient if that's how you distribute the binary. From the GPL:
If distribution of executable or object code is made by offering access to copy from a designated place, then offering equivalent access to copy the source code from the same place counts as distribution of the source code, even though third parties are not compelled to copy the source along with the object code.
From the FAQ:
If a particular user can conveniently get the source from you by anonymous FTP, fine--that does the job.
Presumably, if the person could get the binary via anon FTP (or HTTP, or torrent, or some other Internet mechanism), then that person should have no problem getting the source via anon FTP (or etc.).
If I receive a binary to a GPL'd program I can distribute it without source simply by telling the person I distribute it to where I got the source from. The person I got the source from is responsible for supplying the source to the third party, not me.
That's flat-out wrong. The person who distributes the binaries is responsible for distributing the source. If person A gives a copy of the binary to person B, and person B gives a copy to person C, then person B is responsible for giving a copy of the source to person C, if person C wants it. Person A has no legal responsibility whatsoever to person C. What this means is that if you get a GPL binary that you think that you may leter redictribute, you sure-as-hell had better get a copy of the source, too.
attaching some kind of tag to each firmware binary
OK, then, don't redistribute the binary; just redistribute the source. (Get together with another subscriber and compare source first, to see if any "tags" were placed in the source, too. It should be much easier to remove the tags from the source code than from the binaries.)
It's a desktop environment test session, and this guy's first thought is to download and install stuff which could reasonably be expected to be there.
OK, gotcha, I misunderstood what you were criticizing. I read much of TFA, but only skimmed the actual test session logs/notes themselves.
However, depending on the desktop, one of the first things that I might do is download the latest version of this, that, or the other thing. Before I did, though, I would check to see whether the latest version is already installed.
if you're there to test a desktop you shouldn't really be trying to avoid it via the shell or customise the install with your own software.
I would think that that would be one of the tests that should be done. How easy is it to install my own/other stuff? How well does my own/other stuff integrate with what's there? How easy is it to use several terminal windows, and switch between them? Etc. These are the kinds of things that some users of the desktop will be doing, so I see nothing wrong with this person doing them. It's as much part of the "usability" of the interface as any other part.
If you want to compile (or use, in the case of interpeted languages) a piece of software which uses a certain language, you have to have that language installed.
Except that no part of Gnome itself is written in or uses Python. (That is, an installed version of Gnome does not need Python.) One -- just one -- of the Gnome libraries has an installation script that is written in Python. The developer is rewriting the script in bash, so that Python is no longer necessary to install Gnome. The person to whon I responded quite rudely asserted that the developer was "a goodam idiot" for doing this. I think that he is wrong, and I wrote why.
Actually, that was the second pilot. (Yes, the studio wasn't sure about the show after the first pilot, so GR made a second one, which was the one with Sally Kellerman. IFAIK, it's the only time that two pilots have been made for a TV show.) And it wasn't a magnetic storm; it was the "barrier" that surrounds our galaxy.
What, if any, typical differences do you see in persons producing mucho alpha and persons who don't ?
People who produce more alpha waves are more likely to say "Whoa, dude!" They injest more twinkies than the average person. They are more likely to enjoy Pauly Shore movies.
I mean, you're given a system to test, and "experienced Unix user" is all set to download and install Mozilla?
??? I have been using UNIX and UNIX-like systems since around 1980, and currently I use Mozilla as my primary browser (both in Linux and MS-Windows). What browser do you use?
he's recommending reducing the role of Python in OSS.
All he is saying is that Python should not have to be installed in order to build Gnome. I see nothing wrong with that. There are some people who don't use Python, and these people shouldn't have to install it just so that they can build Gnome. I am saying this as a person whose current favorite language is Python.
I used to find myself similarly annoyed when I found that some project required Java to be installed in order to build something.
Slashdot Mirror
It's not the "Patriot Act", nor is it the "US Patriot Act"; it's the "USAPATRIOT" Act.
Please use the full name.
The "USAPATRIOT" Act has nothing to do with patriotism, so calling it the "Patriot Act" or "US Patriot Act" is misleading.
Personally, I pronounce it "the you sap at riot act" to avoid confusion.
Yay!
You're welcome.
Please use the full name.
The "USAPATRIOT" Act has nothing to do with patriotism, so calling it the "Patriot Act" or "U.S. Patriot Act" is misleading.
Personally, I pronounce it "the you sap at riot act" to avoid confusion.
1. It's pronounced "ihd", not "eye dee".
2. A router used in woodworking is always pronounced "rowter", because it comes from the word "rout", which is always pronounced "rowt".
However, "router" as used in computers is derived from "route", which can be pronounced "root" or "rowt", depending on what part of the country you are from (e.g., near "route 66"), your upbringing, etc.
Therefore, "router" can be pronounced either "rowter" or "rooter".
Since I am partially schizoid, I pronounce route "root", and router "rowter".
Hah!
My first computer game was a version of Star Trek, written in some form of BASIC on a PDP-10, played on an ASR-33 teletype.
That's right, every time you wanted a map of the sector, it was printed out on a piece of paper at ten characters/second.
My first real-time interactive game was called Orbit.
It was written by a friend of mine and myself in FORTRAN for a PDP-11 with a Tektronix 4010 display.
It used the front-panel switches of the computer to control the spaceships.
It was similar to Asteroids without the asteroids, but the ships could fire missles, lay mines, and dock with each other, there was a planet in the middle of the screen that you could land on and that would extert a gravitational influence on everything (ships, mines, and missiles), and locational/fuel guages on the sides so that you could navigate back to the screen (none of this wimpy wrap-around universe stuff).
I tried writing a 3D "FPS" version of it, but the computer was 'way too slow to do anything 3D in real-time.
The department (SUNY/AB EE) banned the game from the machine when they had to replace the front panel switches, and when they learned that the graduate students who were supposed to be using the machine for their projects were instead wasting their time playing Orbit.
(All of this happened around 1974-1975.)
While I wrote the post as a joke, here is how I envision the explosion could take place:
Note: The "USAPATRIOT" Act has nothing to do with patriotism, so I pronounce it "the you sap at riot act" to avoid confusion.
So don't tell me that the Germans never attacked us.
- Grandpa Simpson
1. Robotic helicopter with a very hot engine and a straw sticking out the bottom.
2. 55-Gallon drum of gasoline outgassing from a hole where the straw goes in.
3. (In the words of that "Dances with Wolves" guy from "The Red Green Show") BOOOOM!
Whoops!
I keep forgetting that this is an international forum.
Sorry for my US-centrism.
When Fox was first starting out, they took a lot of chances, and the result was great shows like BCjr.
Unfortunately, now that they are "established", they have become as entrenched in the mainstream as the other three major networks, and for the most part are afraid to try anything new or innovative.
"whatever it's called".
Sorry.
"Stargate SG-1" is pretty good.
"Stargate Atlantis" is too new to judge yet.
"Twilight Zone" reruns abound.
Also, USA (or BBCA, I forget which) is doing reruns of "The Prisoner".
Speaking of BBCA, "Black Adder", "The Thin Blue Line", and "Monty Python's Flying Circus" are all in reruns.
Star Trek reruns from the various series are playing on SpikeTV and elsewhere.
And don't forget "The Simpsons" on Fox.
Finally, "Question Time" on C-SPAN (where Tony Blair and his adversaries trade verbal abuse) is pretty amusing.
(I'd like to see GWB in a similar situation.
It would be hilarious.)
If all you have is broadcast TV, then I'm afraid that you're pretty much limited to "The Simpsons" and "The McNeil/Lehrer Report" (or whatever its called these days).
Non-human primates of various kinds have been raised by (presumably exclusively bipedal) humans for many years now.
One would think that if this were a normally-learnable trait, then at least one of these primates would have done it already.
It would also have been nice if one of you had mentioned that it is a commercial product, so that I wouldn't have had to waste my time Googling for nothing.
From the GPL:From the FAQ:Presumably, if the person could get the binary via anon FTP (or HTTP, or torrent, or some other Internet mechanism), then that person should have no problem getting the source via anon FTP (or etc.).
The person who distributes the binaries is responsible for distributing the source.
If person A gives a copy of the binary to person B, and person B gives a copy to person C, then person B is responsible for giving a copy of the source to person C, if person C wants it.
Person A has no legal responsibility whatsoever to person C.
What this means is that if you get a GPL binary that you think that you may leter redictribute, you sure-as-hell had better get a copy of the source, too.
(Get together with another subscriber and compare source first, to see if any "tags" were placed in the source, too.
It should be much easier to remove the tags from the source code than from the binaries.)
I read much of TFA, but only skimmed the actual test session logs/notes themselves.
However, depending on the desktop, one of the first things that I might do is download the latest version of this, that, or the other thing.
Before I did, though, I would check to see whether the latest version is already installed.I would think that that would be one of the tests that should be done.
How easy is it to install my own/other stuff?
How well does my own/other stuff integrate with what's there?
How easy is it to use several terminal windows, and switch between them?
Etc.
These are the kinds of things that some users of the desktop will be doing, so I see nothing wrong with this person doing them.
It's as much part of the "usability" of the interface as any other part.
(That is, an installed version of Gnome does not need Python.)
One -- just one -- of the Gnome libraries has an installation script that is written in Python.
The developer is rewriting the script in bash, so that Python is no longer necessary to install Gnome.
The person to whon I responded quite rudely asserted that the developer was "a goodam idiot" for doing this.
I think that he is wrong, and I wrote why.
(Yes, the studio wasn't sure about the show after the first pilot, so GR made a second one, which was the one with Sally Kellerman.
IFAIK, it's the only time that two pilots have been made for a TV show.)
And it wasn't a magnetic storm; it was the "barrier" that surrounds our galaxy.
They injest more twinkies than the average person.
They are more likely to enjoy Pauly Shore movies.
I have been using UNIX and UNIX-like systems since around 1980, and currently I use Mozilla as my primary browser (both in Linux and MS-Windows).
What browser do you use?
I see nothing wrong with that.
There are some people who don't use Python, and these people shouldn't have to install it just so that they can build Gnome.
I am saying this as a person whose current favorite language is Python.
I used to find myself similarly annoyed when I found that some project required Java to be installed in order to build something.