Step into the year 2004 and buy one. It's not a big deal.. Get a NEC 2500A and it's under $100 and has very good writing capabilities. Make sure you have a decent, newish DVD player and you probably won't have any issues.
If you're all into control - and it is about control regardless of what the FSF zealots will tell you, then by all means use it.
If you want to contribute code to the world and make it useful and extensible - use MIT/BSD/some other truly free license. _Your_ code will always remain free, what do you care if someone else adds to it?
Right.. I'm sure they "spun" the entire thing and the guy was actually sitting on his chair with a machine gun pointed at the officers. Probably they're all lucky they got out alive.
Umm, not sure what country you're from but in the US getting a DUI is somewhat of a life destroying event.
And it shouldn't absolutely destroy your life unless you kill or harm someone, at least not a first offense. Get real.
Why should getting a DUI ruin your life completely and why should it prevent you from being president? It's ridiculous. What if someone breathes just over the limit - ruined life? Right...that's smart.
Have you not noticed that often in performing one's duties as a software developer inside a company it becomes well nigh impossible to use GPL'd code due to the onerous restriction that one is expected to then release one's own code even if you tangentially use said GPL code?
Is that a little clearer? Sure - any Tom Dick or Harry can use GPL stuff if it meets your needs exactly. But if you try to make your own software that uses some useful GPL code you're pretty much screwed.
What's impotent is the belief that people will continue to use GPL. It's onerous and people are getting tired of it.
GPL _is_ the problem. I don't understand this rabid fanaticism people have over the GPL. _Your_ code will always be free if you use a different licenses, e.g. BSD. This is simply true. What do you care if someone modifies it and keeps the _changes_ they make? It's not going to invalidate your code and make it proprietary.
nobody ever jumps to the obvious conclusion that the real problem is with the freaking GPL. I dont understand. I mentioned this in another thread and got modded down as Flamebait for daring to disparage the great and wonderful GPL.
Come on - why are people so attached to such a pain in the ass licenses? Do any of you have jobs? Haven't you noticed that you basically can't use GPL'd code in a business environment?
The BSD, MIT, Apache, etc... licenses are all vastly superior. You're going to see more and more "not compatible with the GPL!" bullshit.
The real problem is that the GPL sucks. It's difficult to work with and anytime you tell people that they rattle off how it's really about "protecting freedom" instead of "restricting freedom", all the while explaining all these things you _can't_ do with the GPL.
It's asinine and the GPL should be avoided where at all possible. I wish it would just die and the idealogues who promote it would just go away.
This sentiment I can actually agree with. It irritates me to no end when e.g. cable companies pay off some politician to make cable theft a felony, or when music companies unduly influence laws.
I do think, however, that the companies are justified in defending their property even if they are big evil corporations representing talentless pop pansies.
The real issue is that the government needs to reign in maximum penalties and stop selling out.
This law, however, is right. Here in these non-communist..well, I guess that doesn't apply to Canada. But still - when an artist and a studio puts time and effort into making art, they are the ones who decide what happens to it.
I don't understand why nerds get so up in arms when people defend their intellectual property.
If people are breaking the law and sharing music then they deserve what happens. Yeah yeah yeah, they should make sure the person they're suing is the right one and they should be reasonable about the penalties. But they certainly don't have to just stand by and bend themselves over a barrel.
Come on. If they don't patent pretty much everything they can they'll get sued by some pissant company looking to make a quick buck. They got sued over browser plugins for Christ's sake.
It's idiotic to complain about them patenting something like this. Complain about it if they sue someone using the patent. Complain about the patent system. Complain about patent system abusers. But don't use this as yet another sad excuse for jumping on the anti-MS bandwagon.
How sad that such a forum is embarassed by the same idiotic comparisons as you'd hear on your local yokel radio station: "It's like Janet Jackson being appointed style coach to Nickelodean!" (yuk yuk) "It's like Michael Jackson's sister Janet Jackson being appointed censor to a live Belize Dance edition of E Travel Super Party!"
"You have no data.". Umm, good argument there Sophocles. I've shit better arguments than that.
Facts are facts. Windows is the most popular OS and people target it precisely because it is the most popular OS. Go look at all the Linux security holes that _still_ exist and are open to exploitation. Yet nobody does because:
1. Linux is too fractured - you wouldn't be guaranteed that your virus would work on one or another release. 2. Nobody gives a shit about the 2 people (relative to Windows) running Linux.
There's nothing, absolutely nothing, that can be taught in assembler that can't be tought in e.g. C. And C is at least useful in your future life as a burger flip...I mean computer programmer.
They should start with C, which is good at teaching basic procedural programming, move to Java, then go back to assembler to teach the student all the details that were glossed over in those other languages (e.g. what is a pointer really? What is the "stack"?).
I loved assembler back when I was like 18-19 and you used to have to write MSDOS viruses in assembler with int 21 hooks etc... But otherwise it's a small subset of people that really need to know it, and it's easy enough to learn.
Slashdot Mirror
Step into the year 2004 and buy one. It's not a big deal.. Get a NEC 2500A and it's under $100 and has very good writing capabilities. Make sure you have a decent, newish DVD player and you probably won't have any issues.
Not valid. You can buy an e.g. NEC 2500A for less than $100, and the media is getting pretty cheap too.
I waited too, but just went ahead and bought one because they're so damn cheap now.
Exactly. Or the MIT license.
If you code for the fun or to provide the world with something, use BSD/MIT license.
If you're trying to make a pointless statement, by all means use GPL.
Simply sucks. It's a pain in the ass.
If you're all into control - and it is about control regardless of what the FSF zealots will tell you, then by all means use it.
If you want to contribute code to the world and make it useful and extensible - use MIT/BSD/some other truly free license. _Your_ code will always remain free, what do you care if someone else adds to it?
With all the ranting about HAM operators, why has no one asked the obvious question - what's the bandwidth going to typically be?
Right.. I'm sure they "spun" the entire thing and the guy was actually sitting on his chair with a machine gun pointed at the officers. Probably they're all lucky they got out alive.
Don't be a fucking idiot.
Umm, not sure what country you're from but in the US getting a DUI is somewhat of a life destroying event.
And it shouldn't absolutely destroy your life unless you kill or harm someone, at least not a first offense. Get real.
Why should getting a DUI ruin your life completely and why should it prevent you from being president? It's ridiculous. What if someone breathes just over the limit - ruined life? Right...that's smart.
Let me rephrase with matching pomposity:
Have you not noticed that often in performing one's duties as a software developer inside a company it becomes well nigh impossible to use GPL'd code due to the onerous restriction that one is expected to then release one's own code even if you tangentially use said GPL code?
Is that a little clearer? Sure - any Tom Dick or Harry can use GPL stuff if it meets your needs exactly. But if you try to make your own software that uses some useful GPL code you're pretty much screwed.
What's impotent is the belief that people will continue to use GPL. It's onerous and people are getting tired of it.
Right on, brother. Wish I had some mod points.
GPL _is_ the problem. I don't understand this rabid fanaticism people have over the GPL. _Your_ code will always be free if you use a different licenses, e.g. BSD. This is simply true. What do you care if someone modifies it and keeps the _changes_ they make? It's not going to invalidate your code and make it proprietary.
nobody ever jumps to the obvious conclusion that the real problem is with the freaking GPL. I dont understand. I mentioned this in another thread and got modded down as Flamebait for daring to disparage the great and wonderful GPL.
Come on - why are people so attached to such a pain in the ass licenses? Do any of you have jobs? Haven't you noticed that you basically can't use GPL'd code in a business environment?
The BSD, MIT, Apache, etc... licenses are all vastly superior. You're going to see more and more "not compatible with the GPL!" bullshit.
I say: tough shit.
The real problem is that the GPL sucks. It's difficult to work with and anytime you tell people that they rattle off how it's really about "protecting freedom" instead of "restricting freedom", all the while explaining all these things you _can't_ do with the GPL.
It's asinine and the GPL should be avoided where at all possible. I wish it would just die and the idealogues who promote it would just go away.
Yep - I stand corrected. http://neil.eton.ca/copylevy.shtml
Doesn't help the people sharing the music, though.
This sentiment I can actually agree with. It irritates me to no end when e.g. cable companies pay off some politician to make cable theft a felony, or when music companies unduly influence laws.
I do think, however, that the companies are justified in defending their property even if they are big evil corporations representing talentless pop pansies.
The real issue is that the government needs to reign in maximum penalties and stop selling out.
I'd be interested to see how exactly Canada has defied international copyright conventions.
Please refer me to this mythical "leeching" ruling.
Agreed in the abstract.
This law, however, is right. Here in these non-communist..well, I guess that doesn't apply to Canada. But still - when an artist and a studio puts time and effort into making art, they are the ones who decide what happens to it.
Damn moochers.
I don't understand why nerds get so up in arms when people defend their intellectual property.
If people are breaking the law and sharing music then they deserve what happens. Yeah yeah yeah, they should make sure the person they're suing is the right one and they should be reasonable about the penalties. But they certainly don't have to just stand by and bend themselves over a barrel.
Oh boy, a crybaby company suing MS because they were too incompetent to compete in the real market. Yeah - that's the heart of irony. Pfft.
Come on. If they don't patent pretty much everything they can they'll get sued by some pissant company looking to make a quick buck. They got sued over browser plugins for Christ's sake.
It's idiotic to complain about them patenting something like this. Complain about it if they sue someone using the patent. Complain about the patent system. Complain about patent system abusers. But don't use this as yet another sad excuse for jumping on the anti-MS bandwagon.
As opposed to Unix's great security historu?
Oh, wait, I forgot. Unix security has historically been an absolute joke.
But it's not incorrect. The definition of a word isn't defined by a small group of people. It's defined by mass media and common usage.
But hey - argue with the dictionary all you want.
nerds. How many lame assed versions of "it's like the fox guarding the henhouse" jokes can you POSSIBLY make, you filthy simpleton nerds?
How sad that such a forum is embarassed by the same idiotic comparisons as you'd hear on your local yokel radio station:
"It's like Janet Jackson being appointed style coach to Nickelodean!" (yuk yuk)
"It's like Michael Jackson's sister Janet Jackson being appointed censor to a live Belize Dance edition of E Travel Super Party!"
Seriously, how idiotic can you nerds get?
Population: You.
This is old news, and they don't work. You still need to decrypt the data into working code and those decryption headers are easily scannable.
It's a cheesy idea that sounds fancy pantsy.
"You have no data.". Umm, good argument there Sophocles. I've shit better arguments than that.
Facts are facts. Windows is the most popular OS and people target it precisely because it is the most popular OS. Go look at all the Linux security holes that _still_ exist and are open to exploitation. Yet nobody does because:
1. Linux is too fractured - you wouldn't be guaranteed that your virus would work on one or another release.
2. Nobody gives a shit about the 2 people (relative to Windows) running Linux.
There's nothing, absolutely nothing, that can be taught in assembler that can't be tought in e.g. C. And C is at least useful in your future life as a burger flip...I mean computer programmer.
They should start with C, which is good at teaching basic procedural programming, move to Java, then go back to assembler to teach the student all the details that were glossed over in those other languages (e.g. what is a pointer really? What is the "stack"?).
I loved assembler back when I was like 18-19 and you used to have to write MSDOS viruses in assembler with int 21 hooks etc... But otherwise it's a small subset of people that really need to know it, and it's easy enough to learn.