The vrms program will analyze the set of currently-installed packages on a Debian GNU/Linux system, and report all of the packages from the non-free tree which are currently installed.
Future versions of vrms will include an option to also display text from the public writings of RMS and others that explain why use of each of the installed non-free packages might cause moral issues for some in the Free Software community. This functionality is not yet included.
This is the first thing I thought of as well. Mono's largely compatible with Microsoft's.NET implementation. Having something completely different AND more proprietary than.NET 2.0 called.NET 3.0 is a royal kick in the balls. "Not.NET compatible" is something that simple minded people might yap on about now, and I don't guess that Microsoft would discourage such confusion.
Of course, I seem to recall some of the original explanations behind Mono being "We just think the language and runtime are a good idea, regardless of MS.NET" and "They can't change the standardised part" (not so sure about the latter, actually).
(I personally wouldn't care if Windows programmers choose to inflict pain and suffering upon themselves with MS APIs, but every now and then I need to do Windows programming, and thus am exposed to the world of pain...)
A small group of people has, it seems, in secret put Debian into a very dangerous legal position, without consulting the people who have the relevent legal expertise.
1.5 to 2 hours here, depending on traffic. 45 minutes? Luxury! (and I have to get out of the lake at six o'clock in the morning, clean the lake, eat a handful of 'ot gravel, work twenty hour day at mill for tuppence a month...)
Yeah, the customers want a lower quality system that gives kernel developers headaches. Well, stuff that. Thank gosh this isn't a "product". The GPL and structure of community projects like the kernel keeps everyone honest.
(Sorry - stuffed up my original post. Damn lack of post editing...)
Police will be able to issue on-the-spot fines and access and recover profits made by copyright pirates. Courts will be given powers to award larger damages payouts against internet pirates. Civil infringement proceedings will apply to copyright pirates who make electronic reproductions or copies of copyright material.
Wheee. I have this bad image of people being sent automatic/clueless infringement notices for downloading off archive.org or from bands' websites...
Police will be able to issue on-the-spot fines and access and recover profits made by copyright pirates. Courts will be given powers to award larger damages payouts against internet pirates. Civil infringement proceedings will apply to copyright pirates who make electronic reproductions or copies of copyright material.
Wheee. I have this bad image of people being sent automatic/clueless infringement notices for downloading of archive.org or from Bands' websites...infringement proceedings...
Because it's somewhat difficult to write more novels if you cannot afford a new pencil and paper, since you haven't made any money due to everybody else stealing your work and profiting off of it themselves.
Hence copyright was created in order to provide an incentive for people to create things. If a "better" (by some measure - fairer? more enforcable? produces more goodness for the creator? produces more goodness for society? there are many possibilities) method for encouraging creation is implemented, then this would supercede the purpose of copyright.
Copyright is just one artificial incentive method, not a "natural right", which is ideological stuff you see in constitutions like freedom and justice and stuff.
Did you really ask everyone? I think you missed all the people who appreciate all the risk and hassles that laptops present in field recording, need something more portable, don't think that the tradeoff of >2 tracks for computer problems and heaps complex software is worth it, will not pay for expensive pro-audio software when they just want a tape of their rehersal and... gah.
This is the first i've heard of using a minidisc as a band.
WTF? I love Haskell as much as the next programming-language-theory fanboy, but saying "Haskell or one of the other functional languages might be a good idea." in reply to the OP strongly suggests to me that you are just making stuff up and/o are copy/pasting things that you have read elsewhere out of context
If not, then great! Please post some references to literature which demonstrates how what you've suggested is sane and/or possible:)
You talk about making an "ultra stable, crash free" ystem and then talk about crash recovery. I'm guessing from this you don't want to protect the application from harm (eg. full of exception catching and internal recovery from those evil buggy 3rd party librariesor whatnot), but how important is your data? Is that what you mean when you mean ultra stable, that you end up getting the right results at the end? Maybe you should think about redundancy, tracability of results etc.
You don't seem to understand what an argument is. It's a set of axioms/assumptions which, combined with methods of reasoning (ie. rules for turnin assertions into other assertions, such as modus ponens), lead to a certain assertion (the conclusion) being true. This is nothing to do with the person making the argument. If something is true/false, it is true/false, regardless of who's saying it.
Slashdot Mirror
Why not use gnumeric, which has python scripting support, IIRC?
http://packages.debian.org/stable/admin/vrms
Virtual Richard M. Stallman
The vrms program will analyze the set of currently-installed packages on a Debian GNU/Linux system, and report all of the packages from the non-free tree which are currently installed.
Future versions of vrms will include an option to also display text from the public writings of RMS and others that explain why use of each of the installed non-free packages might cause moral issues for some in the Free Software community. This functionality is not yet included.
Erm, WTF is the Trogdor button for? (Besides burnination, obviously)
Are you sure the feds aren't after you now?
What a great surveilance tool, ye olde interweb...
In all fairness, Erdos took amphetamines so he could continue doing math 24 hours a day.
This is the first thing I thought of as well. Mono's largely compatible with Microsoft's .NET implementation. Having something completely different AND more proprietary than .NET 2.0 called .NET 3.0 is a royal kick in the balls. "Not .NET compatible" is something that simple minded people might yap on about now, and I don't guess that Microsoft would discourage such confusion.
.NET" and "They can't change the standardised part" (not so sure about the latter, actually).
Of course, I seem to recall some of the original explanations behind Mono being "We just think the language and runtime are a good idea, regardless of MS
(I personally wouldn't care if Windows programmers choose to inflict pain and suffering upon themselves with MS APIs, but every now and then I need to do Windows programming, and thus am exposed to the world of pain...)
Ideologic war?
A small group of people has, it seems, in secret put Debian into a very dangerous legal position, without consulting the people who have the relevent legal expertise.
1.5 to 2 hours here, depending on traffic. 45 minutes? Luxury! (and I have to get out of the lake at six o'clock in the morning, clean the lake, eat a handful of 'ot gravel, work twenty hour day at mill for tuppence a month...)
Yeah, the customers want a lower quality system that gives kernel developers headaches. Well, stuff that. Thank gosh this isn't a "product". The GPL and structure of community projects like the kernel keeps everyone honest.
Wheee. I have this bad image of people being sent automatic/clueless infringement notices for downloading off archive.org or from bands' websites...
Wheee. I have this bad image of people being sent automatic/clueless infringement notices for downloading of archive.org or from Bands' websites...infringement proceedings...
11. Profit!
What you want is a good type system, not longer names...
Hence copyright was created in order to provide an incentive for people to create things. If a "better" (by some measure - fairer? more enforcable? produces more goodness for the creator? produces more goodness for society? there are many possibilities) method for encouraging creation is implemented, then this would supercede the purpose of copyright.
Copyright is just one artificial incentive method, not a "natural right", which is ideological stuff you see in constitutions like freedom and justice and stuff.
Wasn't it shown that she was on some prearranged tour, rather than being on her own on her bike?
Note that the discussion is about the website and/or the distribution and discussion of rootkit code, not the existence of rootkits.
Yes. "caveat canem" could be translated, for instance, as "May he/she/it beware the dog".
That wasn't Wally, it was some old timer that was sitting with them in the lunchroom, IIRC.
Hmmm...
a rch/045571.html
http://www.winehq.org/pipermail/wine-devel/2006-M
"So there we have it - this appears to be the first release in which they simply started dropping APIs."
"And, therefore, the first time for which we can categorically state that Wine will be more compatible with Windows applications than Windows itself."
"Not to mention that they're handing a near-fatal blow to OpenGL support, too."
etc.
You said it :)
WTF? I love Haskell as much as the next programming-language-theory fanboy, but saying "Haskell or one of the other functional languages might be a good idea." in reply to the OP strongly suggests to me that you are just making stuff up and/o are copy/pasting things that you have read elsewhere out of context
:)
If not, then great! Please post some references to literature which demonstrates how what you've suggested is sane and/or possible
You talk about making an "ultra stable, crash free" ystem and then talk about crash recovery. I'm guessing from this you don't want to protect the application from harm (eg. full of exception catching and internal recovery from those evil buggy 3rd party librariesor whatnot), but how important is your data? Is that what you mean when you mean ultra stable, that you end up getting the right results at the end? Maybe you should think about redundancy, tracability of results etc.
You don't seem to understand what an argument is. It's a set of axioms/assumptions which, combined with methods of reasoning (ie. rules for turnin assertions into other assertions, such as modus ponens), lead to a certain assertion (the conclusion) being true. This is nothing to do with the person making the argument. If something is true/false, it is true/false, regardless of who's saying it.
patched version for better acronym coverage:
YRO: EFF vs ATT re NSA FUBAR
BB's CD:
EFF vs AT&T re: NSA USC H4X0R
FTA: "SNAFU: NSA & etc. GAs pwn NOCs, POTS, & DBs w/ ATT"
Need to get rid of the pwn, & and w/ somehow I think...