Because when I see an interesting ad for web hosting, database services or hot bawls I click on it and spend a few minutes debating why I'm not going to pay for the service/bawls.
I wouldn't call myself joe six-pack (dispite the spare tire) but I've found myself clicking on ads in firefox when I never would before. Mostly this out out of curiosity because an ad I see actually looks interesting.
It's amazing how much interesting stuff I'm finding out there now that the hit-teh-monk3y-2-win crap is out of my way.
Those of you blocking ads on slashdot better be paying for your subscription. I am a subscriber but I don't bother blocking ads. Ah, the joys of browsing in light mode. ^_^
I mean, finding where the torrents are, waiting for them to finish...while it sounds easy, is actually a lot more work what anyone should ever put forth just to watch "survivor".
The rudeness is uncalled for, particularly since your quote does not address the ability to sell modified versions of the sun source (something one can do with GNU, obviously) and, in fact, does not even state that what manner of license you're granted!
There is nothing even remotely resembling an explicit statement allowing redistribution in the quotation you cite there, so pack up your bitchy little tude and fuck off back to the bog you crawled out of.
What is bad is the additional restrictions. And if you cannot freely reditribute your modifications to others, I -for one- question how "open" such source is.
I mean, microsoft's "shared source" is "open source of some sort", but the restrictions on that license make it essentially worthless.
The difference being that there are proffesionals and editors and solid accountability which serve to keep britannica up to an acceptable level of accuracy.
With wikipedia, any article you read is only as good as the uneducated prole who wrote it, and the unpaid so-called 'volunteer' who "fact-checks" it.
The general rule of thumb is that wikipedia has some excellent articles on niche internet phenomenons...but outside of cult net interests, it fails miserably; particularly when compared to encarta or britannica.
considering that wikipedia's content is distorted to hell and back by varying trolling factions; I think that reading tea leaves might prove to be a more reliable news source than what's being proposed.
If you weren't brain-washed by ann coulter or whoever you would realise that the democrats want very desperately to have family-values street cred and would throw their support behind any movement that "curbs obscenity".
Don't believe me? Two words: "tipper gore".
Still not convinced? here's two more: "clipper chip".
The conservatives were able to push through their agenda precisely because the democrats want that credibility, as well as having the excuse of all those shrieking soccer moms.
With the nipple slip, the conservatives were handed a convient excuse to push through the agenda which they were already wanting to persue (namely, 'cleaning up' the airwaves).
Regarding corruption; politicians may (or they -more likely- may not) be interested in appearing as though they are doing something about it, but they're not really interested in doing anything substantial about it.
Is there a way to do a network install of fedora? I'm not sure why, but every cd I download is corrupted and unusable; so installing from cd is pointless for me.
Thanx.:)
urlopen error (100061, connection refused)
on
FreeBSD 5.3 Released
·
· Score: -1, Offtopic
Gentlemen, I do believe we've slashdotted bittorrent.
Slashdot Mirror
Because when I see an interesting ad for web hosting, database services or hot bawls I click on it and spend a few minutes debating why I'm not going to pay for the service/bawls.
I wouldn't call myself joe six-pack (dispite the spare tire) but I've found myself clicking on ads in firefox when I never would before. Mostly this out out of curiosity because an ad I see actually looks interesting.
It's amazing how much interesting stuff I'm finding out there now that the hit-teh-monk3y-2-win crap is out of my way.
Don't worry, most people browsing slashdot use IE so there's still a small spot of sanity on the web.
Those of you blocking ads on slashdot better be paying for your subscription.
I am a subscriber but I don't bother blocking ads. Ah, the joys of browsing in light mode. ^_^
I mean, finding where the torrents are, waiting for them to finish...while it sounds easy, is actually a lot more work what anyone should ever put forth just to watch "survivor".
downloaders need to get some priorities!!!
What are the media conglomerates going to do to regain the control that they've lost?
They won't improve their content, so can they eliminate the internet surfer's ability to get what they want when they want it?
If so, how so?
How will they (further) ruin the internet? How are they going to turn it into a passive means of consumption?
This is what's important to know.
The rudeness is uncalled for, particularly since your quote does not address the ability to sell modified versions of the sun source (something one can do with GNU, obviously) and, in fact, does not even state that what manner of license you're granted!
There is nothing even remotely resembling an explicit statement allowing redistribution in the quotation you cite there, so pack up your bitchy little tude and fuck off back to the bog you crawled out of.
Thank You.
So stick to a BSD style license then. Then if you want to distribute it, you can, if you want to horde it, you can.
At least with either license, you're free to hand out any changes you may have made to the source code.
What is bad is the additional restrictions. And if you cannot freely reditribute your modifications to others, I -for one- question how "open" such source is.
I mean, microsoft's "shared source" is "open source of some sort", but the restrictions on that license make it essentially worthless.
The requested URL /pipermail/wikipedia-l/2004-October/035328.html/ was not found on this server.
Apache/1.3.29 Server at mail.wikimedia.org Port 80
The difference being that there are proffesionals and editors and solid accountability which serve to keep britannica up to an acceptable level of accuracy.
..but outside of cult net interests, it fails miserably; particularly when compared to encarta or britannica.
With wikipedia, any article you read is only as good as the uneducated prole who wrote it, and the unpaid so-called 'volunteer' who "fact-checks" it.
The general rule of thumb is that wikipedia has some excellent articles on niche internet phenomenons.
considering that wikipedia's content is distorted to hell and back by varying trolling factions; I think that reading tea leaves might prove to be a more reliable news source than what's being proposed.
well, not me since I never bought into their "do no evil" hype..but the rest of you who did are a big-ass bunch of st00pid suckers.
If I want to use their pre-built packages, do I have to be running the latest CVS, or can 1.6 handle it?
People pay taxes, corporations recieve "justice".
I am still banned, aren't I?
Apparently they weren't fluent in C enough to write their own. ;)
If you weren't brain-washed by ann coulter or whoever you would realise that the democrats want very desperately to have family-values street cred and would throw their support behind any movement that "curbs obscenity".
Don't believe me? Two words: "tipper gore".
Still not convinced? here's two more: "clipper chip".
The conservatives were able to push through their agenda precisely because the democrats want that credibility, as well as having the excuse of all those shrieking soccer moms.
There's a difference.
With the nipple slip, the conservatives were handed a convient excuse to push through the agenda which they were already wanting to persue (namely, 'cleaning up' the airwaves).
Regarding corruption; politicians may (or they -more likely- may not) be interested in appearing as though they are doing something about it, but they're not really interested in doing anything substantial about it.
And you propose to get rid of the corruption how, exactly?
PLEASE tell me "by voting", I need a good laugh today!
What's in it for me, if you start taxing Internet Telephony?
You'll be allowed to continue using it.
Is there a way to do a network install of fedora? I'm not sure why, but every cd I download is corrupted and unusable; so installing from cd is pointless for me.
:)
Thanx.
Gentlemen, I do believe we've slashdotted bittorrent.
For those of you who, like me, cannot afford vmware, might I suggest qemu?