You are right o quite a lot of things but you forget one thing: We haven't observed macro evolution (the kind that gives birth to new species) so it is still a theory (or rather a collection of theories given the number of schools in this theory). And to help you have another view on science, math and religion you should ponder this saying:
If a `religion' is defined to be a system of ideas that contains unprovable statements, then Godel taught us that mathematics is not only a religion, it is the only religion that can prove itself to be one.
-- John Barrow
It's the first time I read an Haskell program (and I heard about it only recently), I suppose that the first line is the declaration of the function: name:: Parameters -> [Result]
and the second line the definition:
name parameters = body body == [return-values] But is the [] here to indicate that it is not a single value but a list (or array or whatever Haskell uses)?
For the Scheme version I must say that I am fairly new and unexperienced in Scheme and didn't knew what values was doing, that is , up to now;)
For Perl, Perl Sucks... no just kidding. Given what I have read about it (Perl being a bastard of C and Shell programming) I suppose that shift is used to adress the arguments of the function, and that without parameter it returns the first one.
One of the (few) ways the Linux kernel has innovated*** since the Tannenbaum/Torvalds arguement is the introduction of loadable modules.
Isn't it kinda ironic that one of the few ways Linux innovated was by getting closer to the concept of a microkernel and departing from the concept of monolithic kernel;)
Then it was the functional/logic languages (like LISP from the functional camp and PROLOG from the logic camp)
I wouldn't want to deceive you but LISP is far older than structured programming, in fact there is only one programming language (and programming style) that is older than Lisp, and this is FORTRAN (and pure imperative style). Some may argue that assembly language was here before and they would be right, but the difference is that assembly isn't a language per see, it isn't compiled/interpreted as other languages but it is translated.
Well, IANAHY and IWNHITDOTBBS but ITAWY that the TLA's are going DTD. I mean, WTF do we need TLA's, FLA's, FiLA's and other NLA's? NOIENMFLBIMCWTSTLA's, we could do as well with OLA's only. AAE we could say "W T F" instead of "WTF".
ITAWY: I Totally Agree With You IANAHY: I Am Not A Hacker Yet IWNHITDOTBBS: I Was Not Here In The Days Of The Bulletin Board Systems TLA: Three Letter Acronym DTD: Down The Drain WTF: Why The Fuck FLA: Four Letters Acronym FiLA: Five Letters Acronum NLA: N Letters Acronym NOIENMFLBIMCWTSTLA: Not Only Is English Not My First Language But I Must Cope With These Stupid Three Letters Acronyms OLA: One Letter Acronym AAE: As An Example W: Why T: The F: Fuck
OITIWSH: Ok I Think I Will Stop Here
BTW (By The Way), what does mean the CERTAINLY acronym???;)
Right, there are legal uses of copying. I wasn't clear enough, then: it's the illegal copying I'm concerned about, though secondarily I also believe that discussing legal copying just muddies the waters.
No, we must insist on it I think, and for three reasons:
1. if we don't we may manage to keep our right to view DVD's but our right to copy them (or other copyighted material for that matter) for personal use will be a little bit more diluted because we haven't fought for it. Some more dilutions and they will manage to make it illegal.
2. Even if CSS was protecting against copying (which isn't the case, you just copy encrypted data) the fact is that it would protect against any copying, included fair use, so even in the case were Free Software Players for any platform you can think of there probably would be a case against the MPAA (or maybe just the DVD-CCA) because they are violating their customers rights to copy.
3. Even if players were legally available for any OS you can think of there would be at one time or another (when DVD-R's prices fall) where people would have done a software to copy DVD's, not to illegally copy it (thought some would have done so, as always there are some black sheep) but to make backup copies (which are completely legal). Today they are more likely to buy a new copy given that the price between a DVD-R and a new DVD makes it stupid to pay more to have less (the cool box), but when DVD-R's prices fall we may want to exerce our right to copy.
4. Create DVD's of original material to which you hold the copyright
You are totally right, I forgot this one (and it is a very important one (my guess is that they probably are breaking the antitrust laws by controlling the access to the market)).
I know that currently this is not a very likely scenario, but when DVDRs and media become more common and less expensive it may become an issue.
Let's say I want to put my holliday on DVD's, this is completely legal isn't it? But how do I do?
I can't see much we can do... except that those who really do talk about copying should just shut up, since you're ruining it for the rest of us. (You do exist, yes.) The community should try to talk about its issue as "viewing".
I disagree, copying can be legal, this is called fair use, and this is why VCR are legal.
We must win this fight, but if we don't claim our right to copy for personal use in this case they will manage to eat to bit by bit until copying for fair use purpose is illegal.
There are law that allow us copying so we shouldn't be afraid to say
It is true that this software can be used in three ways:
1. Legally view the DVD's you have legally bought on a legal device you have legally purchased
2. Legally copy DVD's for yourself under the right of fair use (if they manage to make it illegal they will soon manage to make VCR illegals).
3. Illegally copy DVD's you don't own.
On these three uses only the first is practical (viewing) because of the price of blank DVd's and DVD burners, therefore making it the principal use of this software.
Any person saying that DeCSS's primary purpose is copying is misinformed at best and deliberately lying at worst, given that some sort of copying are legal (fight to keep your right to fair use) saying that the primary purpose of DeCSS is illegal copying is even more misinformed or lying.
Even if DeCSS and other methods are declared illegals we must continue to mirror it, redistribute it,...
This is more than our right, this is our duty, to preserve the remaining of democraty that legal corruption (lobbying) has left.
I may seem *a little bit upset* but what Mr Valenti is doing right now has a name, it's called propaganda (cool stuff they do for X BTW;)).
Remember that that Linux API is entirely a copy of someone else's API. Either Unix or Plan 9
Linux does implement some API from Plan 9??? I didn't knew (well, I don't know that much about Plan either:( but I remember reading an article about it and it seemed quite cool).
Re:Another (L)GPLed project that will never finish
on
GNUstep 0.6.5 freeze
·
· Score: 2
was thinking of learning objective-c (objective-c==openstep?) but if i gotta buy some devkit from apple to get the full functionality and only be able to run stuff on OSX then i guess i wouldn't be bothered...
Objective C != OpenStep.
Objective C is a programming language that adds OO style programming to C but with a philosophy closer to Smalltalk than to C++ (i.e. Java also has a Smalltalk-like philosophy but with C++ syntax), thus Objective C has got great merits on its own.
OpenStep use Objective C, so it integrates well with OpenStep, but you can use it without OpenStep.
By the way, Next made the Objective C front end for GCC, and first tried to release it in binary only (they thought that releasing the.o binary was compliant with the GPL), RMS contacted them to tell them it was in violation and they re-released it under the GPL.
I have also heard that Apple has got a compiler in which you can mix Objective C and C++, must be pretty cool.
I haven't used it personally so it is things I have heard about it in various tutorials/explanations/... When I get the time I definitively must check it (I'm checking Guile right now).
As I've said before, this is a PURE PORT thread. WINE is cool, but it still requires a Windows version of a game, and there *is* principle involved here.
Winelib is a library that helps PORTING programs under Linux, but after that they are not Windows program anymore and cannot be run by Windows but are Linux executable, that's why it should count.
Of course there is also an executable Wine which acts like an emulator, and which doesn't count.
Of course, had this been a development linux kernel, everyone would rush to the defense with screams of "It's not ready for primetime, developers only!", etc.
Nope, nothing compared. If you actually had read the article you would know that this affect final versions too, this is more alike of having a bug in the 2.2.0 kernel before any Linux distro issue a distro using this kernel. This would still be a stable kernel but not yet available in the form of a distribution.
I partly disagree with this statement, Wine can be used either as an emulator or as a development library to port your software under Linux (what Corel use it for), I think that the former don't count but the latter certainly count.
Anyway, I don't follow that much the game scene now and i am stuck with Windows (because I'm doing my studies 1000km from home and I couldn't take my computer on my back in the train/ferry).
Second anyway, given that i have, at last, received my grants and that I don't have an overdraft anymore I will be able to buy Quake 3, the Linux version of course (but I will use it under Windows;) because of the lack of Linux for me:().
Their implementation doesn't rely on Litestep-specific code, so the implementation + interface could be lifted out and used by closed-source projects.
The interface certainly could be implemented in a proprietary way but if they put the implementation under the GPL/LPGL then those that want to implement the interface have to start to code the implementation from scratch, without code from the GPL'd implementation.
The interface itself remain copyable fortunately, otherwise their would be no Linux/*BSD/... and not even MS-DOS would have been legal (being a copy of CPM).
Publicizing doesn't have to be online. Put up posters!
Personally I think it would be great to have some sort of small advertisement campaign (flyers, bus stops...) with a slogan under (or above) a picture of Jon Johansen:
<BOLD> "Next time you go to Cinema, don't forget that your money is used to <STRIKE>persecute </STRIKE> prosecute kids" </BOLD>
Meanwhile, lots of hackers see "capitalism" as the problem, when it's fascism, mercantilism, oligopoly and the like that they're really upset about -- they just don't realize it.
I realise it, and this kind of things is the reason why I want to spit when somebody calls America "The land of Freedom", nowadays I consider the USA to be a Fascist state, like it or leave, but I stay in Europe, I wouldn't want to go in America save for Holidays.
If I remember correctly, with a satellite connection you download via the satellite so you have got high speed, and you upload with a classical connection (modem, DSL, cable, aslthough the last two would be a little be silly with a satellite).
What I would like to see in the future would be equipment powerful enough a affordable enough to transmit TO the satellite.
Anyway, I guess that if this come true one day we will have more story like the crackers that took the command of a british satellite (I don't even remember if this was a true story or an hoax).
Well, I spoke about it with a girl and tried to look at it but she was so outraged by the comments I made that she left me off with two cheeks having a high blood pressure.
Is that what is called a Geek trying to date a girl???;)
As much as I respect their work, the guys at Slashdot have to eat, sleep, and post articles. They can't be coding round the clock.
Why not??? Then we should jail them and give them for only distraction the possibility to write / code, without having the possibility to post stories of course, this would take too much time for them to check the story and they probably would complain of having been jailed and other human rights stupidities.
Have you ever heard of Yogi Berra, an American baseball player?
Not at all, but I don't know a lot of French soccer player so I am less likely to know American Baseball players.
He's famous for saying things like: "It's deja vu all over again!" Deja vu encore! Perhaps there's a funnier way to translate it?
I can't think of any funny way to translate it but I think that "It's deja vu all over again!" is better said in English,I can't find a good way to translate it back in French, maybe "C'est du deja vu deja vu" (it's a "deja vu" deja vu) but this isn't really funny
By the way, I think that what made me think of using "deja vu" instead of "already seen" was Neo in Matrix, when he talks about the black cat, I probably encountered it b4 but hadn't integrated in the English I used at the time.
If this hypothetical economist wishes to show off his English, or simply because any short Chinese term he might use for 'moral hazard' implies too many unwanted connotations, he may simply plop the English term 'moral hazard' into the language. That's how 'deja vu' started
What you are saying is that the fact of importing a foreign term in you language is deja vu, oups, I meant already seen;)
BTW, I'm French and at first I was telling "already seen" instead if "deja vu" because I didn't knew how to say it, until somebody told me:). Now when I don't know a term I use the French one and one time out of two this is the good one or a close one.
RedHat got the top spot by far in the "preferred NOS" section. Is it a popular but poor OS? I don't think so. It's not surprising to find faults in various bits of Linux, but what'll be interesting is how quickly such faults are fixed.
While I agree with you on the second part I wouldn't base myself on the poll to say that Redhat (or Linux in general for that matter) is that much popular, not that it isn't but what prove that every people having voted (for Redhat or for another NOS) are in fact people using NOS everyday for their job? The poll probably is biased due to the/. effect.
Slashdot Mirror
You are right o quite a lot of things but you forget one thing: We haven't observed macro evolution (the kind that gives birth to new species) so it is still a theory (or rather a collection of theories given the number of schools in this theory). And to help you have another view on science, math and religion you should ponder this saying:
If a `religion' is defined to be a system of ideas that contains unprovable statements, then Godel taught us that mathematics is not only a religion, it is the only religion that can prove itself to be one.
-- John Barrow
(Haskell)
factors
factors large-prime = [large-prime 1]
It's the first time I read an Haskell program (and I heard about it only recently), I suppose that the first line is the declaration of the function:
name
and the second line the definition:
name parameters = body
body == [return-values]
But is the [] here to indicate that it is not a single value but a list (or array or whatever Haskell uses)?
For the Scheme version I must say that I am fairly new and unexperienced in Scheme and didn't knew what values was doing, that is , up to now
For Perl, Perl Sucks... no just kidding. Given what I have read about it (Perl being a bastard of C and Shell programming) I suppose that shift is used to adress the arguments of the function, and that without parameter it returns the first one.
Have I it right
One of the (few) ways the Linux kernel has innovated*** since the Tannenbaum/Torvalds arguement is the introduction of loadable modules.
Isn't it kinda ironic that one of the few ways Linux innovated was by getting closer to the concept of a microkernel and departing from the concept of monolithic kernel
Then it was the functional/logic languages (like LISP from the functional camp and PROLOG from the logic camp)
I wouldn't want to deceive you but LISP is far older than structured programming, in fact there is only one programming language (and programming style) that is older than Lisp, and this is FORTRAN (and pure imperative style). Some may argue that assembly language was here before and they would be right, but the difference is that assembly isn't a language per see, it isn't compiled/interpreted as other languages but it is translated.
Prolog OTOH is from the eighties.
and we CERTAINLY didn't use long acronyms
Well, IANAHY and IWNHITDOTBBS but ITAWY that the TLA's are going DTD. I mean, WTF do we need TLA's, FLA's, FiLA's and other NLA's? NOIENMFLBIMCWTSTLA's, we could do as well with OLA's only. AAE we could say "W T F" instead of "WTF".
ITAWY: I Totally Agree With You
IANAHY: I Am Not A Hacker Yet
IWNHITDOTBBS: I Was Not Here In The Days Of The Bulletin Board Systems
TLA: Three Letter Acronym
DTD: Down The Drain
WTF: Why The Fuck
FLA: Four Letters Acronym
FiLA: Five Letters Acronum
NLA: N Letters Acronym
NOIENMFLBIMCWTSTLA: Not Only Is English Not My First Language But I Must Cope With These Stupid Three Letters Acronyms
OLA: One Letter Acronym
AAE: As An Example
W: Why
T: The
F: Fuck
OITIWSH: Ok I Think I Will Stop Here
BTW (By The Way), what does mean the CERTAINLY acronym???
Right, there are legal uses of copying. I wasn't clear enough, then: it's the illegal copying I'm concerned about, though secondarily I also believe that discussing legal copying just muddies the waters.
No, we must insist on it I think, and for three reasons:
1. if we don't we may manage to keep our right to view DVD's but our right to copy them (or other copyighted material for that matter) for personal use will be a little bit more diluted because we haven't fought for it. Some more dilutions and they will manage to make it illegal.
2. Even if CSS was protecting against copying (which isn't the case, you just copy encrypted data) the fact is that it would protect against any copying, included fair use, so even in the case were Free Software Players for any platform you can think of there probably would be a case against the MPAA (or maybe just the DVD-CCA) because they are violating their customers rights to copy.
3. Even if players were legally available for any OS you can think of there would be at one time or another (when DVD-R's prices fall) where people would have done a software to copy DVD's, not to illegally copy it (thought some would have done so, as always there are some black sheep) but to make backup copies (which are completely legal). Today they are more likely to buy a new copy given that the price between a DVD-R and a new DVD makes it stupid to pay more to have less (the cool box), but when DVD-R's prices fall we may want to exerce our right to copy.
4. Create DVD's of original material to which you hold the copyright
You are totally right, I forgot this one (and it is a very important one (my guess is that they probably are breaking the antitrust laws by controlling the access to the market)).
I know that currently this is not a very likely scenario, but when DVDRs and media become more common and less expensive it may become an issue.
Let's say I want to put my holliday on DVD's, this is completely legal isn't it? But how do I do?
A LIE REPEATED ONE HUNDRED TIMES BECOMES THE ULTIMATE TRUTH.
Gobels
Actually, what you are saying is a lie, but so much people have said it, now everybody believes it is true
I can't see much we can do
I disagree, copying can be legal, this is called fair use, and this is why VCR are legal.
We must win this fight, but if we don't claim our right to copy for personal use in this case they will manage to eat to bit by bit until copying for fair use purpose is illegal.
There are law that allow us copying so we shouldn't be afraid to say
It is true that this software can be used in three ways:
1. Legally view the DVD's you have legally bought on a legal device you have legally purchased
2. Legally copy DVD's for yourself under the right of fair use (if they manage to make it illegal they will soon manage to make VCR illegals).
3. Illegally copy DVD's you don't own.
On these three uses only the first is practical (viewing) because of the price of blank DVd's and DVD burners, therefore making it the principal use of this software.
Any person saying that DeCSS's primary purpose is copying is misinformed at best and deliberately lying at worst, given that some sort of copying are legal (fight to keep your right to fair use) saying that the primary purpose of DeCSS is illegal copying is even more misinformed or lying.
Even if DeCSS and other methods are declared illegals we must continue to mirror it, redistribute it,...
This is more than our right, this is our duty, to preserve the remaining of democraty that legal corruption (lobbying) has left.
I may seem *a little bit upset* but what Mr Valenti is doing right now has a name, it's called propaganda (cool stuff they do for X BTW
Remember that that Linux API is entirely a copy of someone else's API. Either Unix or Plan 9
Linux does implement some API from Plan 9??? I didn't knew (well, I don't know that much about Plan either
was thinking of learning objective-c (objective-c==openstep?) but if i gotta buy some devkit from apple to get the full functionality and only be able to run stuff on OSX then i guess i wouldn't be bothered...
.o binary was compliant with the GPL), RMS contacted them to tell them it was in violation and they re-released it under the GPL.
Objective C != OpenStep.
Objective C is a programming language that adds OO style programming to C but with a philosophy closer to Smalltalk than to C++ (i.e. Java also has a Smalltalk-like philosophy but with C++ syntax), thus Objective C has got great merits on its own.
OpenStep use Objective C, so it integrates well with OpenStep, but you can use it without OpenStep.
By the way, Next made the Objective C front end for GCC, and first tried to release it in binary only (they thought that releasing the
I have also heard that Apple has got a compiler in which you can mix Objective C and C++, must be pretty cool.
I haven't used it personally so it is things I have heard about it in various tutorials/explanations/... When I get the time I definitively must check it (I'm checking Guile right now).
Anyway, for more informations see this.
As I've said before, this is a PURE PORT thread. WINE is cool, but it still requires a Windows version of a game, and there *is* principle involved here.
Winelib is a library that helps PORTING programs under Linux, but after that they are not Windows program anymore and cannot be run by Windows but are Linux executable, that's why it should count.
Of course there is also an executable Wine which acts like an emulator, and which doesn't count.
Of course, had this been a development linux kernel, everyone would rush to the defense with screams of "It's not ready for primetime, developers only!", etc.
Nope, nothing compared. If you actually had read the article you would know that this affect final versions too, this is more alike of having a bug in the 2.2.0 kernel before any Linux distro issue a distro using this kernel. This would still be a stable kernel but not yet available in the form of a distribution.
and note that WINE doesn't count.
I partly disagree with this statement, Wine can be used either as an emulator or as a development library to port your software under Linux (what Corel use it for), I think that the former don't count but the latter certainly count.
Anyway, I don't follow that much the game scene now and i am stuck with Windows (because I'm doing my studies 1000km from home and I couldn't take my computer on my back in the train/ferry).
Second anyway, given that i have, at last, received my grants and that I don't have an overdraft anymore I will be able to buy Quake 3, the Linux version of course (but I will use it under Windows
Their implementation doesn't rely on Litestep-specific code, so the implementation + interface could be lifted out and used by closed-source projects.
The interface certainly could be implemented in a proprietary way but if they put the implementation under the GPL/LPGL then those that want to implement the interface have to start to code the implementation from scratch, without code from the GPL'd implementation.
The interface itself remain copyable fortunately, otherwise their would be no Linux/*BSD/... and not even MS-DOS would have been legal (being a copy of CPM).
Publicizing doesn't have to be online. Put up posters!
Personally I think it would be great to have some sort of small advertisement campaign (flyers, bus stops...) with a slogan under (or above) a picture of Jon Johansen:
<BOLD>
"Next time you go to Cinema, don't forget that your money is used to <STRIKE>persecute </STRIKE> prosecute kids"
</BOLD>
Meanwhile, lots of hackers see "capitalism" as the problem, when it's fascism, mercantilism, oligopoly and the like that they're really upset about -- they just don't realize it.
I realise it, and this kind of things is the reason why I want to spit when somebody calls America "The land of Freedom", nowadays I consider the USA to be a Fascist state, like it or leave, but I stay in Europe, I wouldn't want to go in America save for Holidays.
If I remember correctly, with a satellite connection you download via the satellite so you have got high speed, and you upload with a classical connection (modem, DSL, cable, aslthough the last two would be a little be silly with a satellite).
What I would like to see in the future would be equipment powerful enough a affordable enough to transmit TO the satellite.
Anyway, I guess that if this come true one day we will have more story like the crackers that took the command of a british satellite (I don't even remember if this was a true story or an hoax).
Look at the inner ear
Well, I spoke about it with a girl and tried to look at it but she was so outraged by the comments I made that she left me off with two cheeks having a high blood pressure.
Is that what is called a Geek trying to date a girl???
As much as I respect their work, the guys at Slashdot have to eat, sleep, and post articles. They can't be coding round the clock.
Why not??? Then we should jail them and give them for only distraction the possibility to write / code, without having the possibility to post stories of course, this would take too much time for them to check the story and they probably would complain of having been jailed and other human rights stupidities.
NOTE to moderators: DON'T TAKE IT SERIOUSLY
Have you ever heard of Yogi Berra, an American baseball player?
Not at all, but I don't know a lot of French soccer player so I am less likely to know American Baseball players.
He's famous for saying things like: "It's deja vu all over again!" Deja vu encore! Perhaps there's a funnier way to translate it?
I can't think of any funny way to translate it but I think that "It's deja vu all over again!" is better said in English,I can't find a good way to translate it back in French, maybe "C'est du deja vu deja vu" (it's a "deja vu" deja vu) but this isn't really funny
By the way, I think that what made me think of using "deja vu" instead of "already seen" was Neo in Matrix, when he talks about the black cat, I probably encountered it b4 but hadn't integrated in the English I used at the time.
For those that don't believe in God, this is the ultimate proof that a miracle can happen
I won'd use it directly myself but thanks
If this hypothetical economist wishes to show off his English, or simply because any short Chinese term he might use for 'moral hazard' implies too many unwanted connotations, he may simply plop the English term 'moral hazard' into the language. That's how 'deja vu' started
What you are saying is that the fact of importing a foreign term in you language is deja vu, oups, I meant already seen
BTW, I'm French and at first I was telling "already seen" instead if "deja vu" because I didn't knew how to say it, until somebody told me
Fight spam: insist on the source! Can you imagine eating something that didn't come with an ingredient list? Why use an OS that isn't OS?
Ok, here is NT's ingredient list:
ingredient 1: 0
ingredient 2: 1
If you want to bash MS and/or NT you can say:
ingredient 1: printf("coucou\n")
ingredient 2: patch to correct ingredient 1, adds 2 features and 4 bugs.
ingredient 3: patch...
but given that other people already have done it in a better way I won'd do it again
RedHat got the top spot by far in the "preferred NOS" section. Is it a popular but poor OS? I don't think so. It's not surprising to find faults in various bits of Linux, but what'll be interesting is how quickly such faults are fixed.
While I agree with you on the second part I wouldn't base myself on the poll to say that Redhat (or Linux in general for that matter) is that much popular, not that it isn't but what prove that every people having voted (for Redhat or for another NOS) are in fact people using NOS everyday for their job? The poll probably is biased due to the