I like and use java but miss operator overloading for numeric and numeric collections classes.
In addition, it is mind-blowing to me that the standard java classpath includes so many different libraries and gives you so much functionality, yet it is still missing standard classes for complex numbers, vectors, and matrices. These are things that really ought to be in the standard library, implemented with Altivec or SSE3 or what-have-you via JNI for optimum performance.
It makes programming advanced math projects in C++ a breath of fresh air !
If you go to the MySQL site, they try to convince you that hiding behind the JDBC interface like this is infringing use for which you need a commercial license
This is very very important, can you post a link to the relevant spot on the mysql site for other people to reference?
...Litvinovich said the officers made copies of all documents they found of interest and she was told the search was connected to suspicions that Kasparov's group was involved in extremist activity...
Yes, what you describe is plain nonsense, and that is not what I am saying. You are confusing the tools with the libraries. The mere act of compiling does not have any affect with the GPL - Where it matters is when you distribute the result!
Are you saying that if my configure script for my closed-source application accidentally selects the 'free' version of the trolltech QT library, then I don't have to pay the QT license fees? If so, then it appears that I can save $6,000.00! woo! Somehow, I feel it does not work like that.
It all comes down to this: If I write a library and have a license that says you must give me $1000.00 for every time you ship a product using it, you can either pay me or you can not ship product that is linked to my library - even if it is a libc or libm replacement! Especially considering that my personal libc library runs on obscure embedded DSP chips and my libm is fully vectored!
Similarly, if I write a library and have a license that says that if you link to it then your program must be GPL'd, then you must GPL your program if you distribute a binary of your program linked to my library - even if all you use is my special GPL'd version of printf().
It is your responsibility to make sure that the closed source binaries that you distribute are legally unencumbered - it is not autoconf's job.
--jeffk++
p.s. and for others reading, glibc is under the LGPL, not the GPL.
That is a valid point, however in order to reduce the confusion, glibc is distributed under the LGPL:
This General Public License does not permit incorporating your program into proprietary programs. If your program is a subroutine library, you may consider it more useful to permit linking proprietary applications with the library. If this is what you want to do, use the GNU Lesser General Public License instead of this License.
also, just to be certain: having a commonly named function like 'printf' in my library does not mean that you are free to use it in a proprietary product unless you comply with my licensing terms!
K&R can not disagree with license terms of a library that you agree to - regardless of the function name. If you do not agree to the license terms of anything, do not use it!
The answer to your question is "No" it does not. Why? because the licenses for all those libc libraries specify that they do not - including glibc which is LGPL'd not GPL'd.
If a library was GPL'd and you link to it, then your program is by definition a derivative work. If you do not like this, don't link your code to GPL'd libraries or the GPL'd linux kernel.
Servers typically are unable to verify that the email is from the person that it said it was. Spam is sent with forged email addresses, sometimes real ones. Since SPF is not 'ubuquitous' I get lots of email saying that my email with subject "Buy v1agr@" is returned: "Mailer Daemon: Message rejected". Now, I just have a rule to delete all returned email, and if my email is important I expect some sort of reply otherwise I assume that the message was not delivered.
email is not secure or reliable, and cannot be without a major infrastructure change.
Just because some software uses printf() does not mean the software should be GPL because the software runs on Linux (which has GNU libc).
Why is there so much confusion here? Does no one read the GPL? You don't have to be a lawyer to understand that GNU libc is released under the LGPL, and if it were released under the GPL instead then any program using printf in glibc would be required to be GPL as well.
My whole thought process here is that without crytographically signing the emails, the emails can be forged. Even then, the fact that someone said he 'sent' me an incriminating email does not mean that I received it. My spam filter erases 1200 emails every day, and sometimes there are false positives and sometimes mail servers crash and sometimes my computer crashes and loses files before I read them.
I agree with your posting. If you look at a disk drive's technical manual (which does not come with your disk drive), you will find that the disk drive lifetime is not just MTBF in years, but also stipulates how many power cycles per year that estimate is based upon. The MTBF is guaranteed to reduce significantly if you power cycle the drive many times a day, allowing the drive to get up to temp each time.
I expect that this issue would be reduced for the disk drives that have lower heat generation...
While what usbank.com is confusing to users, if you look at the source code for the non-ssl page you can see it actually uses SSL to transmit the information.
Some of the windows synchronization/threading system is not well thought out, however. For instance I hate the race conditions when sending a message to a thread via PostThreadMessage() - before the thread calls the GetMessage() function, the message queue is not allocated!
And there is no nice way to use the window's primitives to create a multiple-reader / single writer semaphore, like there is with the posix threads style.
Not to say that the posix style of messaging is wonderful or anything, though.
Interesting that it only caters to males, and not females... Is that an insult to males pee habits? or is it sexism against females because it is not inclusive?
I helped port one from win3.1 to win95 in 1996... It worked over the LAN and Internet... It looked like a phone... It supported GSM encoding, and full-duplex audio if your sound card was good enough. The company name was 'Telit', and does not exist anymore.
You can also attack the algorithm by measuring current draw on the cpu, or you can attack it by measuring RF radiation from the system too.
In order to avoid these attacks, the cpu's ALU's etc need to be designed with complementary logic gates such that no matter what signal is changing, there is always a paired signal changing the other way - so there are always the same number of data and clock transitions of every type on every clock cycle, giving you constant power usage.
Slashdot Mirror
This is so true.
I like and use java but miss operator overloading for numeric and numeric collections classes.
In addition, it is mind-blowing to me that the standard java classpath includes so many different libraries and gives you so much functionality, yet it is still missing standard classes for complex numbers, vectors, and matrices. These are things that really ought to be in the standard library, implemented with Altivec or SSE3 or what-have-you via JNI for optimum performance.
It makes programming advanced math projects in C++ a breath of fresh air !
--jeffk++
This is very very important, can you post a link to the relevant spot on the mysql site for other people to reference?
--jeffk++
Nah, Microsoft would never do anything like that... They are a respectable company that does not misrepresent their products.
--jeffk++
Now that Vista is finalized, expect Apple to show more and more of the 'secret' features of leopard!
--jeffk++
--jeffk++
So once this software is installed, that 'little padlock' in the web browser that says to everyone that the connection is secure is lying.
--jeffk++
Yes, what you describe is plain nonsense, and that is not what I am saying. You are confusing the tools with the libraries. The mere act of compiling does not have any affect with the GPL - Where it matters is when you distribute the result!
Are you saying that if my configure script for my closed-source application accidentally selects the 'free' version of the trolltech QT library, then I don't have to pay the QT license fees? If so, then it appears that I can save $6,000.00! woo! Somehow, I feel it does not work like that.
It all comes down to this: If I write a library and have a license that says you must give me $1000.00 for every time you ship a product using it, you can either pay me or you can not ship product that is linked to my library - even if it is a libc or libm replacement! Especially considering that my personal libc library runs on obscure embedded DSP chips and my libm is fully vectored!
Similarly, if I write a library and have a license that says that if you link to it then your program must be GPL'd, then you must GPL your program if you distribute a binary of your program linked to my library - even if all you use is my special GPL'd version of printf().
It is your responsibility to make sure that the closed source binaries that you distribute are legally unencumbered - it is not autoconf's job.
--jeffk++
p.s. and for others reading, glibc is under the LGPL, not the GPL.
That is a valid point, however in order to reduce the confusion, glibc is distributed under the LGPL:
also, just to be certain: having a commonly named function like 'printf' in my library does not mean that you are free to use it in a proprietary product unless you comply with my licensing terms!
--jeffk++
K&R can not disagree with license terms of a library that you agree to - regardless of the function name. If you do not agree to the license terms of anything, do not use it!
The answer to your question is "No" it does not. Why? because the licenses for all those libc libraries specify that they do not - including glibc which is LGPL'd not GPL'd.
If a library was GPL'd and you link to it, then your program is by definition a derivative work. If you do not like this, don't link your code to GPL'd libraries or the GPL'd linux kernel.
--jeffk++
I get so much spam that if I just deleted all my email, my false positive vs number of emails 'rate' would be pretty low too.
Servers typically are unable to verify that the email is from the person that it said it was. Spam is sent with forged email addresses, sometimes real ones. Since SPF is not 'ubuquitous' I get lots of email saying that my email with subject "Buy v1agr@" is returned: "Mailer Daemon: Message rejected". Now, I just have a rule to delete all returned email, and if my email is important I expect some sort of reply otherwise I assume that the message was not delivered.
email is not secure or reliable, and cannot be without a major infrastructure change.
--jeffk++
Why is there so much confusion here? Does no one read the GPL? You don't have to be a lawyer to understand that GNU libc is released under the LGPL, and if it were released under the GPL instead then any program using printf in glibc would be required to be GPL as well.
--jeffk++
But I can forge one of my 'sent' emails as well!
My whole thought process here is that without crytographically signing the emails, the emails can be forged. Even then, the fact that someone said he 'sent' me an incriminating email does not mean that I received it. My spam filter erases 1200 emails every day, and sometimes there are false positives and sometimes mail servers crash and sometimes my computer crashes and loses files before I read them.
--jeffk++
It is a really good thing that it is not possible for a malicious party to create forged emails!
--jeffk++
And that is why organized crime has their own ATM division:
n k_fraud_i_didnt/
http://www.beyondrobson.com/tech/2006/10/avoid_ba
Therefore, not only is the ATM network insecure, it always has been for other reasons.
--jeffk++
MAYBE this court case is why microsoft gave Novell the money...to subvert Novell's testimony, giving SCO a win...
</onspiracy> --jeffk++
Would that be in compliance with the XP SLA?
--jeffk++
I agree with your posting. If you look at a disk drive's technical manual (which does not come with your disk drive), you will find that the disk drive lifetime is not just MTBF in years, but also stipulates how many power cycles per year that estimate is based upon. The MTBF is guaranteed to reduce significantly if you power cycle the drive many times a day, allowing the drive to get up to temp each time.
I expect that this issue would be reduced for the disk drives that have lower heat generation...
--jeffk++
While what usbank.com is confusing to users, if you look at the source code for the non-ssl page you can see it actually uses SSL to transmit the information.
--jeffk++
The Event objects are always problematic; see: boost's rationale for not using events.
And there is no nice way to use the window's primitives to create a multiple-reader / single writer semaphore, like there is with the posix threads style.
Not to say that the posix style of messaging is wonderful or anything, though.
--jeffk++
Interesting that it only caters to males, and not females... Is that an insult to males pee habits? or is it sexism against females because it is not inclusive?
--jeffk++
I helped port one from win3.1 to win95 in 1996... It worked over the LAN and Internet... It looked like a phone... It supported GSM encoding, and full-duplex audio if your sound card was good enough. The company name was 'Telit', and does not exist anymore.
From archive.org:
--jeffk++
I Never said I was happy about it... That's what I have to do...
--jeffk++
Well, that's the cost of security! If the power output isn't constant, you are leaking security bits!
I wonder if the 'Trusted Computing' chips do this - If they don't then this could be researched as a work-around for them.
--jeffk++
cool!
You can also attack the algorithm by measuring current draw on the cpu, or you can attack it by measuring RF radiation from the system too.
In order to avoid these attacks, the cpu's ALU's etc need to be designed with complementary logic gates such that no matter what signal is changing, there is always a paired signal changing the other way - so there are always the same number of data and clock transitions of every type on every clock cycle, giving you constant power usage.
--jeffk++