In which case, software sold without patches and ongoing support should come with a big red sticker on the front saying "not guaranteed to work".
What part of "Microsoft and its suppliers provide the Product and support services (if any) AS IS AND WITH ALL FAULTS, and hereby disclaim all other warranties and conditions, either express, implied or statutory, including, but not limited to, any (if any) implied warranties, duties or conditions of merchantability, of fitness for a particular purpose, of reliability or availability, of accuracy or completeness of responses, of results, of workmanlike effort, of lack of viruses, and of lack of negligence, all with regard to the Product, and the provision of or failure to provide support or other services, information, software, and related content through the Product or otherwise arising out of the use of the Product." don't you understand?;-)
The problem is when the program could only form a complete creative work when combined (via dynamic linking) with the libraries.
But this can never be truly the case with dynamic linking because someone can always create their own version of the dynamic library. Sure it might form a complete program with a GPL library, but it might also form it with something else that obeys the same interface. So the program is not dependant on the GPL library to form a complete creative work. If I don't distribute the GPL library with my binary where is the problem? I have just complied with one side of an interface. Users are free to link, and complete the other side how they like.
That's because there is something fundamentally wrong with seperating the design and documentation from the code. Ultimately the code is the only thing that describes what it does, so the further the "design" and documentation is located away from that, the more out of date and useless it is going to be. If the documentation is autogenerated, it has at least some chance of being current.
One of the reasons for this is undoubtedly that in the software world, those that write the code are not the ones that test it, except perhaps for unit tests. The people writing the code therefore generally have no, or limited experience of testing, or the tools or methodologies available for doing it. Just as many open source projects, have no graphic designer, or UI usability expert working for free on it, they also have no specialist tester.
ESR is hardly a fanatic. He is much more of a pragmatist, falling somewhere between RMS and Torvalds, but much closer to Torvalds than Stallman.
A libertarian, anarchist, gun toting advocate of opening the source of software to just anybody who wants it. Seems like a pretty mainstream guy to me.
and generally requires a Masters or PhD....or the interest in doing one, I forgot to add. Since you have plans to do a PhD, you should try to find a company that will sponsor (or at least tolerate) your doing it while you occupy a research position with them.
Apply for research positions in companies, and not for development ones. At least where I work, the two are clearly distinct. Product research is done by HW&SW researchers, and generally requires a Masters or PhD. These people make patents, algorithms, or fairly raw prototypes. Product developement is done by HW&SW developers, and generally requires a degree. These people develop products for sale, and sometimes productize the ideas that come from research. If you are looking to go back to academic research, then the research angle is the one to pursue. Development (and I speak as a developer) is always same old same old, even when it's a new product, since it's all about "the process". Following the process, renewing the process, refining the process, documenting the process, auditing the process, ignoring the process when it comes to crunch time,.... blech.
Well whatever you actually think about the shroud itself, 2000 years is obviously included in "up to" 3000 years. I agree there is no basis for the second statement's seeming certainty that it was 2000 years ago. It may also have been woven at a time nowhere near his death. But presumably our date range is now (provisionally) extending from the original dating in the middle ages back to 1000BC.
The problem is exactly people who look at their mouse, or who are thinking of it in terms of "left does this, right does this" instead of allowing an unconcious hand-eye association to build up between what they do with their hand, and what they see on the screen.
If you see people with persistent problems with computers, they always take their eyes off the screen to look at the mouse or keyboard. It would be like if I looked down at my feet everytime I wanted to brake the car, or looked at the steering wheel when I wanted to turn it. They are completely ignoring the only feedback mechanism available to them.
And people have lots of problems with their phones. Slashdot never stops bitching about how it's too complicated to use.
They wouldn't however be buying the toilet paper, cookies and soda from the same people as they do when advertising is present. It's the ability to significantly influence the direction of an essentially arbitrary choice that makes advertising valuable to individual corporations.
But the point is surely that they decided there was nothing to prevent Columbia from re-entering. The availability or otherwise of a rescue facility won't make a bit of difference once you have made that decision (or blocked people from gathering enough data to make it an informed decision).
In India, by contrast about 300 million people, or 29% of the population, live on less than a dollar a day
This kind of thing is often said, but I have a (genuine) quesiton about it? Aren't a lot of those people farmers, and don't a lot of those people have access to at least some farmable land? The value of the land alone would put their actual budget much higher, at least if we are fairly comparing it to western society, which I presume you are, since you quote their budget in dollar terms.
Note, I'm not trying to make any point about how poor these people are, I know India has terrible problems, I am just querying whether the "dollar a day" thing really reflects reality. Is it really a dollar a day, the same value dollar as you get in a western city, or do they have the potential to get more bang for their buck so to speak.
A NASA engineer requires a lot of expertise, and is employed, therefore the Indian equivelent very likely requires a lot of expertise and is employed. Said expertise requires higher education - you've just employed a professor or five. Said expert's income can go towards housing and food - you've just employed a carpenter and a farmer... yes. Noone is going to eat a space module, but the persons responsible for mining the materials to construct it are, as are the people who constructed it, support it...
I'm sorry, regardless of whether the Indian Space project is a good idea, your argument is no good. Everything you have said could equally be applied to building enormous statues of elephants (white ones perhaps). If you pump enough money into anything it will of course create a local support economy, but ultimately if it lacks a tangible return on investment, it will bankrupt you in the long run.
Whatever national benefits an Indian space program are going to generate they are not going to come from the simple fact of pumping in money to the program. They might come form increased national pride, or from increased technical or manufacturing skills that others are willing to buy, or breakthroughs in research that are valuable in the real world, and so on. However there is a perfectly valid case to be made that expertise and those resources ought to be applied in more sensible areas of the economy.
Well, GNU Make is open-source, so you can extend it, if you want to.
Well, you can extend it, but you more than likely won't be able to get your patch into the main version. The project is extremely conservative about any new functionality. If it's not in GNU make, you can't use your new functionality if you hope to distribute to more than yourself.
It's almost the same as the situation with internet explorer. Until the program with the most market share improves, everyone who cares about working with the marjority of people is stuck with a deficient system.
English, for example, has a lexical past-progressive tense marker, was, used in the first person singular (e.g. I was running to the store). Some languages have no notion of tense. What, then, does was mean in the context of such a language?
Plainly it means nothing significant. In most cases the distinction it makes in English contains no useful information. We think such words are useful, because a sentence sounds "wrong" without them, or because we know that a certain type of information is being lost without it, but in most cases the same fundamental information can be communicated without them, or with a less specific alternative. "I am running to the store. A big man attacks me" is just as understandable as "I was running to the store, when a big man attacked me". The vast majority of machine translation is not going to suffer unduly if it fudges such distinctions.
How can you possibly claim to be having an impact on something but absolutely no idea what that impact is? Unless you measure something you can't make the first statement, and if you do measure it you can't make the second statement
Not necessarily. He may do much unpaid hobby programming that he keeps for himself. The only thing you can conclude is that he loves getting money when he gives his programming to others more than he loves giving it away to others for free.
Slashdot Mirror
Or maybe a kind of gentoo or lfs for generating your own licences. You know, so you get extra performance and configurability.
That's because there is something fundamentally wrong with seperating the design and documentation from the code. Ultimately the code is the only thing that describes what it does, so the further the "design" and documentation is located away from that, the more out of date and useless it is going to be. If the documentation is autogenerated, it has at least some chance of being current.
One of the reasons for this is undoubtedly that in the software world, those that write the code are not the ones that test it, except perhaps for unit tests. The people writing the code therefore generally have no, or limited experience of testing, or the tools or methodologies available for doing it. Just as many open source projects, have no graphic designer, or UI usability expert working for free on it, they also have no specialist tester.
#6 Conspicuously unintelligent; stupid: dumb officials; a dumb decision.
Apply for research positions in companies, and not for development ones. At least where I work, the two are clearly distinct. Product research is done by HW&SW researchers, and generally requires a Masters or PhD. These people make patents, algorithms, or fairly raw prototypes. Product developement is done by HW&SW developers, and generally requires a degree. These people develop products for sale, and sometimes productize the ideas that come from research. If you are looking to go back to academic research, then the research angle is the one to pursue. Development (and I speak as a developer) is always same old same old, even when it's a new product, since it's all about "the process". Following the process, renewing the process, refining the process, documenting the process, auditing the process, ignoring the process when it comes to crunch time, .... blech.
We call vacuum cleaners Hoovers though :-)
Well whatever you actually think about the shroud itself, 2000 years is obviously included in "up to" 3000 years. I agree there is no basis for the second statement's seeming certainty that it was 2000 years ago. It may also have been woven at a time nowhere near his death. But presumably our date range is now (provisionally) extending from the original dating in the middle ages back to 1000BC.
You should never explain things in terms of left and right to anybody.
The problem is exactly people who look at their mouse, or who are thinking of it in terms of "left does this, right does this" instead of allowing an unconcious hand-eye association to build up between what they do with their hand, and what they see on the screen.
If you see people with persistent problems with computers, they always take their eyes off the screen to look at the mouse or keyboard. It would be like if I looked down at my feet everytime I wanted to brake the car, or looked at the steering wheel when I wanted to turn it. They are completely ignoring the only feedback mechanism available to them.
And people have lots of problems with their phones. Slashdot never stops bitching about how it's too complicated to use.
They wouldn't however be buying the toilet paper, cookies and soda from the same people as they do when advertising is present. It's the ability to significantly influence the direction of an essentially arbitrary choice that makes advertising valuable to individual corporations.
Advertising should be subject to audio and visual pollution taxes. That might make people think twice before plastering it everywhere.
But the point is surely that they decided there was nothing to prevent Columbia from re-entering. The availability or otherwise of a rescue facility won't make a bit of difference once you have made that decision (or blocked people from gathering enough data to make it an informed decision).
You really increased your market share by pointing that one out ;)
Note, I'm not trying to make any point about how poor these people are, I know India has terrible problems, I am just querying whether the "dollar a day" thing really reflects reality. Is it really a dollar a day, the same value dollar as you get in a western city, or do they have the potential to get more bang for their buck so to speak.
Whatever national benefits an Indian space program are going to generate they are not going to come from the simple fact of pumping in money to the program. They might come form increased national pride, or from increased technical or manufacturing skills that others are willing to buy, or breakthroughs in research that are valuable in the real world, and so on. However there is a perfectly valid case to be made that expertise and those resources ought to be applied in more sensible areas of the economy.
It's almost the same as the situation with internet explorer. Until the program with the most market share improves, everyone who cares about working with the marjority of people is stuck with a deficient system.
How can you possibly claim to be having an impact on something but absolutely no idea what that impact is? Unless you measure something you can't make the first statement, and if you do measure it you can't make the second statement
Bits is the usual measurement for connection speeds. I don't think there is anything unusial about it. My DSL connection is 100Mbps for instance :-P
Not necessarily. He may do much unpaid hobby programming that he keeps for himself. The only thing you can conclude is that he loves getting money when he gives his programming to others more than he loves giving it away to others for free.