My point is that before police can determine if someone lacks any kind of documentation, or speak any language, they have to stop him and demand the ID.
First and foremost: Unless cops will decide to stop and harass people at random (and they will never dare), they have to decide whom to stop and whom to leave alone.
Since there is no criterion available to them other than perceived race, cops have to either refuse to enforce this law, intentionally harass people who can't possibly be immigrants, or engage in racial profiling. They also would miss "criminals" like myself because they will never have time to stop vaguely-Jewish looking guys.
And this is where it's getting completely insane: If they will actually stop US citizrn (who may or may not be Hispanic), and he does not have ID, they will have no way to determine that he is American, or that he breaks any law, because Americans are not required to carry documents. If they'll arrest him, he can sue them (but, of course, they are too racist to expect such audacity from a Hispanic person, US citizen or not).
So it's a shit law that can only be enforced in an illogical, and independently from being illogical, racist way.
And how does that help when there are thousands and thousands of students per teacher, all located in some dinky forums where they probably spend most their time badmouthing the teachers?
Plus, students refer to books and videos when discussing - usually the one who can back it up wins.
So those would be students who didn't need the course in the first place? Not to mention, other students won't have the same books. At best it will be references to Wikipedia, and Wikipedia itself suffers from the same problem.
Except there was no progress in industrial automation since cheap workers became available. Good luck translating iPhone assembly procedure into GE/Fanuc G-code.
Oh, not this shit again... Neither Photoshop nor MS Office made any noticeable progress in at least a decade, all they do is messing with the user interface.
"Philantropy" == "dangling money in front of people and telling them to dance".
If Gates really wanted to do something good, he would take a machine gun, and kill people responsible for Windows development, including himself and Ballmer. Because that's the best he can do.
The 'presentation' part of most education be automated. I really don't see that as controversial at all.
The "presentation" part of most education was first automated in, I think, ancient Babylon or Egypt. China started producing cheap handheld versions of those devices in 1st-3rd century CE/AD. Then Johannes Gutenberg increased the bandwidth of copying and distribution (at slight expense of resolution).
Do any Slashdotters know of a good source for news about Chinese labor disputes?
I am sure, Foxconn, Apple, CIA, Chinese Communist Party and Dalai Lama have plenty to say about those things. Or, by "good" you mean something that is not pure spin? Then no.
My point in bringing up the Linux Kernel is that some contributions to the kernel are strictly GPL'd, yet software using Linux must by necessity access functions in the kernel to perform basic tasks normally assigned to an operating system. As such they are linking to those functions and technically in violation of the GPL.
Userspace software does not link with kernel, and does not call functions in kernel. It doesn't even use kernel headers. System call are performed through macros that are a part of libc, and syscall format is completely unrelated to the C function call convention.
Most kernel functions are LGPL'd
No, they are not. Syscall macros and wrappers (both in libc) are.
I guess, I repeat what others already mentioned in other forms, but interaction without teacher is more likely to build a shared mythology based on superficial understanding of the course -- someone proposes a plausible "explanation", others will accept it and build upon it, getting farther and farther from the truth.
OK, so they're wasting power. What is it that the NY Times wants me to do?
Buy VMware products, and pretend that you can keep half of the datacenter off, then get paged, drive to the data center, manually activate hundreds of servers, and "transparently" move running instances of your servers, still connecting to the users waiting responses, to those servers. Then wait there, so you can reverse this once users are not requesting as much.
This is one major reason that companies (even very large companies with "money to spare") are moving towards virtualization with incredible speed.
No, they move to virtualization because they think, they run their services on Windows, and because their admins read VMWare ads in glossy magazines.
There are non-virtualization solutions such as VServer, OpenVZ and LXC (and infrastructure based on those), not to mention traditional multiple services on a physical host. And any non-crappy server-side application can share load between multiple servers.
And if I carried that card, it would be by now stolen at least three times, and used by actual illegal immigrants or local criminals. What causes actual legal trouble, as opposed of never carrying it. Except, maybe, in Arizona if you look Mexican.
Except for building a Basic interpreter on an extremely limited platform in assembly
Many, many people, most of them mediocre engineers and programmers, accomplished the same. I have seen a bunch of them in two years (1986-87) when I used Basic before abandoning it for Pascal and Assembly.
The point of the LGPL is to explicitly clean up the legal mess about plug-ins, suggesting that software which isn't GPL'd can explicitly use those plug-ins and "libraries" which are licensed under the LGPL. Permission is explicitly granted for this kind of use.
And it means that at very least FSF intended to have such distinction, so GPL does not include and never intended to include permission to link object code into non-GPL software.
The only possible question is that if copyright law itself considers results of linking a derived work, thus enabling to make such distinction. And the answer is yes.
If you instead use the GPL instead of the LGPL, that sort of forces software which uses those libraries to also be GPL'd. MySQL used this sort of licensing scheme as a way to force you to use their alternative (and very proprietary) license for commercial products for a fee.
This has nothing to do with GPL and everything with MySQL.
As for the Linux kernel, that is a huge grey area. Linus Torvald may say it is OK to use ordinary proprietary licensed software on Linux,
This only applies to in-kernel proprietary software (what at this point means, NVIDIA and AMD graphics drivers). It's Linus who licensed kernel, so only his intentions matter if there is any doubt. Someone who wrote software, distributed it under GPL, then found it re-used in Linux kernel and decided that he disagrees with use of his software in a manner Linus considers acceptable, may have a valid complaint against Linus' interpretation, however such a thing never happened, and is unlikely to happen, so it's a moot point.
but Richard Stallman may beg to differ.
Richard Stallman never intended to prevent proprietary software from being used on free operating systems, and there is nothing in GPL, LGPL or any statements from Stallman or FSF to express such intention. Stallman dislikes proprietary software, and would prefer that it didn't exist in the first place, but mere dislike does not prohibit people from using it. I am sure, Theo de Raadt does not like the idea of baby mulching machines, either.
If the only "clue" as to illegal immigration was the "look" and accent of the person in question, then that would similarly be insufficient to generate sufficient suspicion (theoretically, according to the law).
What other criteria are supposed to be used by police to stop people and demand documents?
So if I'll go to New Mexico and leave my stupid green card at home (What, someone carries those things? They are nearly impossible to replace if lost!), police will harass me and put me in jail until I'll find a lawyer who will go to California, take it from my home and bring it for them to see?
It's actually the opposite. The "post factum lucky-evil-no-talent" myth
Those are facts. Gates never shown any kind of engineering talent, his prominence is based on him being referred by a relative to IBM, and his behavior was consistently unethical.
is driven by people who hate Microsoft.
Any sane and honest person who knows anything about Microsoft, hates Microsoft.
my primary OS is Debian Linux
No, it isn't, unless by "primary desktop" you mean a VM you run, so you can create plausibly-sounding FUD for Microsoft "social marketing" efforts.
Slashdot Mirror
My point is that before police can determine if someone lacks any kind of documentation, or speak any language, they have to stop him and demand the ID.
First and foremost:
Unless cops will decide to stop and harass people at random (and they will never dare), they have to decide whom to stop and whom to leave alone.
Since there is no criterion available to them other than perceived race, cops have to either refuse to enforce this law, intentionally harass people who can't possibly be immigrants, or engage in racial profiling. They also would miss "criminals" like myself because they will never have time to stop vaguely-Jewish looking guys.
And this is where it's getting completely insane:
If they will actually stop US citizrn (who may or may not be Hispanic), and he does not have ID, they will have no way to determine that he is American, or that he breaks any law, because Americans are not required to carry documents. If they'll arrest him, he can sue them (but, of course, they are too racist to expect such audacity from a Hispanic person, US citizen or not).
So it's a shit law that can only be enforced in an illogical, and independently from being illogical, racist way.
Teachers are allowed to participate in forums.
And how does that help when there are thousands and thousands of students per teacher, all located in some dinky forums where they probably spend most their time badmouthing the teachers?
Plus, students refer to books and videos when discussing - usually the one who can back it up wins.
So those would be students who didn't need the course in the first place? Not to mention, other students won't have the same books. At best it will be references to Wikipedia, and Wikipedia itself suffers from the same problem.
Except there was no progress in industrial automation since cheap workers became available. Good luck translating iPhone assembly procedure into GE/Fanuc G-code.
No. Now, for mentally deficient people:
How. Does. Police. Choose. Whom. To. Stop?
hairyfeet is again to the Microsoft's rescue, insulting people who are smarter than him...
Oh, not this shit again... Neither Photoshop nor MS Office made any noticeable progress in at least a decade, all they do is messing with the user interface.
"Philantropy" == "dangling money in front of people and telling them to dance".
If Gates really wanted to do something good, he would take a machine gun, and kill people responsible for Windows development, including himself and Ballmer. Because that's the best he can do.
The 'presentation' part of most education be automated. I really don't see that as controversial at all.
The "presentation" part of most education was first automated in, I think, ancient Babylon or Egypt.
China started producing cheap handheld versions of those devices in 1st-3rd century CE/AD.
Then Johannes Gutenberg increased the bandwidth of copying and distribution (at slight expense of resolution).
Do any Slashdotters know of a good source for news about Chinese labor disputes?
I am sure, Foxconn, Apple, CIA, Chinese Communist Party and Dalai Lama have plenty to say about those things. Or, by "good" you mean something that is not pure spin? Then no.
THERE IS NO NEED TO CHANGE THE BIOS SETTINGS FROM DEFAULT TO RUN HEADLESS!
And it will run SATA controller in Windows XP mode. I guess, it counts as "running".
My point in bringing up the Linux Kernel is that some contributions to the kernel are strictly GPL'd, yet software using Linux must by necessity access functions in the kernel to perform basic tasks normally assigned to an operating system. As such they are linking to those functions and technically in violation of the GPL.
Userspace software does not link with kernel, and does not call functions in kernel. It doesn't even use kernel headers. System call are performed through macros that are a part of libc, and syscall format is completely unrelated to the C function call convention.
Most kernel functions are LGPL'd
No, they are not. Syscall macros and wrappers (both in libc) are.
I guess, I repeat what others already mentioned in other forms, but interaction without teacher is more likely to build a shared mythology based on superficial understanding of the course -- someone proposes a plausible "explanation", others will accept it and build upon it, getting farther and farther from the truth.
OK, so they're wasting power. What is it that the NY Times wants me to do?
Buy VMware products, and pretend that you can keep half of the datacenter off, then get paged, drive to the data center, manually activate hundreds of servers, and "transparently" move running instances of your servers, still connecting to the users waiting responses, to those servers. Then wait there, so you can reverse this once users are not requesting as much.
Yes, it's exactly as stupid as it sounds.
This is one major reason that companies (even very large companies with "money to spare") are moving towards virtualization with incredible speed.
No, they move to virtualization because they think, they run their services on Windows, and because their admins read VMWare ads in glossy magazines.
There are non-virtualization solutions such as VServer, OpenVZ and LXC (and infrastructure based on those), not to mention traditional multiple services on a physical host. And any non-crappy server-side application can share load between multiple servers.
That's why you use VMs and never turn the machines off. Just live migrate the server around.
No, that's why you run your services on a shared pool of servers with containers separating unrelated services. VMs are for Windows.
s/opposed of/opposed to/
And if I carried that card, it would be by now stolen at least three times, and used by actual illegal immigrants or local criminals. What causes actual legal trouble, as opposed of never carrying it. Except, maybe, in Arizona if you look Mexican.
What the Hell do you know about Russian politicians in 1990's?
Said Anonymous Coward whose only information about Soviet Union comes from US Cold War propaganda.
Except for building a Basic interpreter on an extremely limited platform in assembly
Many, many people, most of them mediocre engineers and programmers, accomplished the same. I have seen a bunch of them in two years (1986-87) when I used Basic before abandoning it for Pascal and Assembly.
The rest of your post is pure baseless bullshit.
The point of the LGPL is to explicitly clean up the legal mess about plug-ins, suggesting that software which isn't GPL'd can explicitly use those plug-ins and "libraries" which are licensed under the LGPL. Permission is explicitly granted for this kind of use.
And it means that at very least FSF intended to have such distinction, so GPL does not include and never intended to include permission to link object code into non-GPL software.
The only possible question is that if copyright law itself considers results of linking a derived work, thus enabling to make such distinction. And the answer is yes.
If you instead use the GPL instead of the LGPL, that sort of forces software which uses those libraries to also be GPL'd. MySQL used this sort of licensing scheme as a way to force you to use their alternative (and very proprietary) license for commercial products for a fee.
This has nothing to do with GPL and everything with MySQL.
As for the Linux kernel, that is a huge grey area. Linus Torvald may say it is OK to use ordinary proprietary licensed software on Linux,
This only applies to in-kernel proprietary software (what at this point means, NVIDIA and AMD graphics drivers). It's Linus who licensed kernel, so only his intentions matter if there is any doubt. Someone who wrote software, distributed it under GPL, then found it re-used in Linux kernel and decided that he disagrees with use of his software in a manner Linus considers acceptable, may have a valid complaint against Linus' interpretation, however such a thing never happened, and is unlikely to happen, so it's a moot point.
but Richard Stallman may beg to differ.
Richard Stallman never intended to prevent proprietary software from being used on free operating systems, and there is nothing in GPL, LGPL or any statements from Stallman or FSF to express such intention. Stallman dislikes proprietary software, and would prefer that it didn't exist in the first place, but mere dislike does not prohibit people from using it. I am sure, Theo de Raadt does not like the idea of baby mulching machines, either.
If the only "clue" as to illegal immigration was the "look" and accent of the person in question, then that would similarly be insufficient to generate sufficient suspicion (theoretically, according to the law).
What other criteria are supposed to be used by police to stop people and demand documents?
s/New Mexico/Arizona/
So if I'll go to New Mexico and leave my stupid green card at home (What, someone carries those things? They are nearly impossible to replace if lost!), police will harass me and put me in jail until I'll find a lawyer who will go to California, take it from my home and bring it for them to see?
I don't look like Mexican.
It's actually the opposite. The "post factum lucky-evil-no-talent" myth
Those are facts. Gates never shown any kind of engineering talent, his prominence is based on him being referred by a relative to IBM, and his behavior was consistently unethical.
is driven by people who hate Microsoft.
Any sane and honest person who knows anything about Microsoft, hates Microsoft.
my primary OS is Debian Linux
No, it isn't, unless by "primary desktop" you mean a VM you run, so you can create plausibly-sounding FUD for Microsoft "social marketing" efforts.