Go away, nutjob. I believe that FreeNet itself (as opposed to their website where you can download the software) doesn't even use DNS - and even it did, the Supreme Court has repeatedly struck down restrictions of freedom of speech on the Internet. And the FCC rules on bad language simply do not apply to the Internet.
After you've downloaded you can test your new SVG-enabled mozilla build by checking out these galleries (see links on left of page). The thumbnails are ordinary bitmap images but they are linked to SVGs.
Bonus: All the images in the above galleries are Open Source, unless otherwise stated! (Quite literally, because SVG files are like "source code" for a vector image.)
As for SVG creating and editing software, apart from the new dSVG software announced earlier today on Slashdot, we have:
Apache Batik for all you Java people. This is a fairly mature library (I believe it's based off the CSIRO library), plus sample apps like a viewer, a rasteriser (i.e. convert to gif, jpeg, etc.), a font converter, and a pretty-printer. Quotage: "With Batik, you can manipulate SVG documents anywhere Java is available. You can also use the various Batik modules to generate, manipulate, transcode and search SVG images in your applications or applets." Batik, according to its test suite, supports all of the static SVG specification (i.e. static images) and some of the dynamic specification (i.e. animations and scripting).
(Get your easy installable RPMs for Batik, and many other Java projects, at jpackage - but good luck finding a download link that works! Batik 1.5 hadn't propagated to all the Sourceforge mirrors when I tried it last night - so try all the US mirrors, it will be on at least one of them. Also, because of the numerous dependencies, it's recommended to use a smart package manager that can automatically resolve dependencies, like apt-get or urpmi.)
Sodipodi, [screenshots] a GNOME SVG drawing app, currently at version 0.32. It hosts the open source SVG image gallery linked to above.
For more, including KDE/Konq support for SVG, see this Wiki page
There is no such thing as a "GPL Compatible" license in the sense that you are trying to use it, and the people telling you that you cannot link to GPL code with anything but other GPL code are correct.
No they aren't, you can link it with Apache-licensed code, as long as you release it under the GPL.
This confusion stems from the unique usage of the word "compatible" that is used by the FSF. When the FSF talks about "compatible" licenses, they mean licenses which allow the covered code to be re-licensed as GPL'd code.
Yes, such as the BSD. Please, stop being misleading. It is perfectly allowed to link code which has been released (by someone else) under say the Apache license, with code under the GPL.
That's as maybe, but unfortunately it's very difficult in a "two-party" situation where two huge parties are entrenched and no other party gets a look in because of a first-past-the-post voting system.
Actually, I think I can top that. When Bush visited Italy for the G8 meeting in summer 2001 (scene of the Genoa protests), the possibility of planes being used as terrorist weapons was mooted, and the airspace over Genoa was closed and anti-aircraft guns were put in place.
And yet they expect us to believe that before September 11, no aerial defenses were in place to protect the Pentagon and the White House?
For example the US was ready for an invasion by planes missiles etc... but on Sept. 11, the terrorists used something nobody expected.
False.
Sept. 11, 2001 - The National Reconnaissance Office (NRO), the federal agency that runs many of the nation's spy satellites, schedules an exercise involving a plane crashing into one of the agency's buildings. "On the morning of Sept. 11, 2001," according to a website advertising a homeland security conference in Chicago run by the National Law Enforcement and Security Institute, CIA official John Fulton and his team "were running a pre-planned simulation to explore the emergency response issues that would be created if a plane were to strike a building. Little did they know that the scenario would come true in a dramatic way." Fulton is the head of the NRO's strategic gaming division.
""We couldn't possibly have known this."
"We didn't know that airlines are subject to this kind of attack."
It's almost one year after the attack on America and we know that these kinds of statements had been a lie.
The CIA and FBI were warned by at least eight secret services and had thirty to forty indices about a possible attack with planes. The FAA had sent out five warnings to the airports about possible hijacks or similar incidents.
On August 6, 2001 the CIA delivered a memo to George Bush about a terrorist attack. On August 23 the FBI released an "urgent cable".
But the most damning evidence that something was known was the enactment of at least eight to ten bio- or regular terrorist exercises during 2000 and 2001.
The last big one took place in June 2001 and another CIA exercise was confirmed for the day of September 11th!
From http://www.ratical.org/ratville/CAH/AVE_STE.html
It is beyond dispute now that Bush lied when he said the government had no idea this could happen. They had plenty of idea. This kind of idea had been speculated about for years.
Netscape's use of mozilla is entirely allowed under the Mozilla Public License, as far as I'm aware. They public all the source code to the files they've modified, and they don't have to publish the source code to the files they added. It's not like the GPL in that regard.
Who the heck has a longer patent term than the U.S? If it has expired in the U.S then you can pretty much bet it has expired elsewhere, but ten years earlier.
Not if the non-US patent was applied for, or first came into first, later than the US patent.
If a filesystem introduces new types of metadata, they don't magically get supported by tar.
Yes they do, if they're seen by tar as ordinary files. That was one of the main points of the article, which not many people here seem to have read (as per usual).
Why go to all that trouble, just keep a list of changed blocks
If the file format is a serialization of an in-memory structure or something similar, inserting one byte may cause all the bytes after that to be shifted along by one. So all the blocks after the changed block will also be changed. Not very efficient.
The patent on LZW expired in the US recently. However, it may not have yet expired in all jurisdictions in which Sun does business, so that could be the reason.
I usually end up having to go to Windows because it's the only place that I can force a massively corrupted partition to mount (and it has better SBP2 support). From there I can copy everything that is still good off and reformat the drive.
This hasn't just happened once. More like 3 or 4 times (both EXT3 and Reiser partitions) over the last year or so.
[emphasis added]
Wow, you can mount Reiserfs partitions in Windows? Impressive! How do you do that?
This century, we discovered that the geometry of the universe is not Euclidean, an idea so radical that Kant had used the fact that the universe was Euclidean as that something that could be just taken as a given. This century, we discovered that we can liberate large amounts of energy by splitting the atom (from the Greek word meaning indivisible), an idea Lord Kelvin found ludicrous.
Last century, you mean. In case you haven't noticed, we're in the 21st century now.
It's not an example of a troll. You don't seem to understand what a troll is. A troll has to deceive people and make them angry enough to post an angry response.
That post even starts with the word "Funny!" - as if that was needed! So even dimwits are given a helping hand!
That's what they claimed to have done. But they are still, even now, offering it on their FTP servers. That counts as distribution for copyright purposes.
Oddly enough Boies not only didn't win but didn't even bother to go after criminal perjury for Gates and crew.
Reality check: Mr Gates is a very rich man. Mr Gates has friends in high places, many of whom would want to be able to get away with similar perjuries themselves if they had to. The chances of him being arrested for perjury in a case like that are very remote. Even if elements of the DOJ wanted to do it, they would almost certainly have been overruled.
It can happen to politicians, e.g. Jeffrey Archer, but that is very rare. And maybe 100 years ago Gates would have been jailed - but these days governments are beholden to big business.
Slightly OT, but the case against CleanFlicks and the like is not even remotely reasonable sounding. Directors vision? Please. In the past parents have had children leave the room or cover their eyes for a single objectionable scene.
True, but I think it's about control - maybe bleeping out a few swear words is not very frightening in itself - after all, the networks do it all the time - but they don't want to see "original+patch" legally distinguished from "derivative work". That would have worrying implications.
And not just for the MPAA. Richard Stallman certainly doesn't want to see "original + binary patch" legally distinguished from "derivative work"! If CleanFlicks et. al. win this case, those who are presently seen as "GPL violators" could try to use the same technique and argument to get around the GPL.
I'd be interested to see how someone could argue that the GPL can extend to "binary patches", whereas the movie studios have no control over "DVD patches".
Slashdot Mirror
Don't you think competition like B&N would absolutely love Amazon to do that?
Amazon is not Coutts. It's a mass market website, for Christ's sake.
I see a RPM for Redhat 7.1 (gee, up to date), but no straight tar.gz. The link on mozilla.org is broken.
What happened to it?
Bonus: All the images in the above galleries are Open Source, unless otherwise stated! (Quite literally, because SVG files are like "source code" for a vector image.)
As for SVG creating and editing software, apart from the new dSVG software announced earlier today on Slashdot, we have:
(Get your easy installable RPMs for Batik, and many other Java projects, at jpackage - but good luck finding a download link that works! Batik 1.5 hadn't propagated to all the Sourceforge mirrors when I tried it last night - so try all the US mirrors, it will be on at least one of them. Also, because of the numerous dependencies, it's recommended to use a smart package manager that can automatically resolve dependencies, like apt-get or urpmi.)
No they aren't, you can link it with Apache-licensed code, as long as you release it under the GPL.
This confusion stems from the unique usage of the word "compatible" that is used by the FSF. When the FSF talks about "compatible" licenses, they mean licenses which allow the covered code to be re-licensed as GPL'd code.
Yes, such as the BSD. Please, stop being misleading. It is perfectly allowed to link code which has been released (by someone else) under say the Apache license, with code under the GPL.
And yet they expect us to believe that before September 11, no aerial defenses were in place to protect the Pentagon and the White House?
False.
From Oh Lucy! - You Gotta Lotta 'Splainin To Do by From the Wilderness From http://www.ratical.org/ratville/CAH/AVE_STE.htmlIt is beyond dispute now that Bush lied when he said the government had no idea this could happen. They had plenty of idea. This kind of idea had been speculated about for years.
I was pointing out that Office could well be relying on hidden API calls in the Wine system (because it includes win32 dlls).
Not if the non-US patent was applied for, or first came into first, later than the US patent.
Yes they do, if they're seen by tar as ordinary files. That was one of the main points of the article, which not many people here seem to have read (as per usual).
If the file format is a serialization of an in-memory structure or something similar, inserting one byte may cause all the bytes after that to be shifted along by one. So all the blocks after the changed block will also be changed. Not very efficient.
This hasn't just happened once. More like 3 or 4 times (both EXT3 and Reiser partitions) over the last year or so.
[emphasis added]
Wow, you can mount Reiserfs partitions in Windows? Impressive! How do you do that?
Last century, you mean. In case you haven't noticed, we're in the 21st century now.
I reckon they're eager to pretend to bite the hand that feeds it. They haven't actually done anything to MS yet.
That post even starts with the word "Funny!" - as if that was needed! So even dimwits are given a helping hand!
That's what they claimed to have done. But they are still, even now, offering it on their FTP servers. That counts as distribution for copyright purposes.
Reality check: Mr Gates is a very rich man. Mr Gates has friends in high places, many of whom would want to be able to get away with similar perjuries themselves if they had to. The chances of him being arrested for perjury in a case like that are very remote. Even if elements of the DOJ wanted to do it, they would almost certainly have been overruled.
It can happen to politicians, e.g. Jeffrey Archer, but that is very rare. And maybe 100 years ago Gates would have been jailed - but these days governments are beholden to big business.
True, but I think it's about control - maybe bleeping out a few swear words is not very frightening in itself - after all, the networks do it all the time - but they don't want to see "original+patch" legally distinguished from "derivative work". That would have worrying implications.
And not just for the MPAA. Richard Stallman certainly doesn't want to see "original + binary patch" legally distinguished from "derivative work"! If CleanFlicks et. al. win this case, those who are presently seen as "GPL violators" could try to use the same technique and argument to get around the GPL.
I'd be interested to see how someone could argue that the GPL can extend to "binary patches", whereas the movie studios have no control over "DVD patches".
There comes a point where spam itself causes >1 hour delays in mail being read (or even delivery failures due to quotas being filled).