The hard copy of this article is in the November 17 issue. (I read it -- it's in our lunch room.) You may be sure that the RHEnterprise/Fedora split was not official when it was written.
These articles must be submitted at least a month or two in advance of printing. RH9 was certainly the latest officially available at that time.
To begin, most (non-military) GPS devices are not that exact. They are accurate to within about 15 feet. So there's the innacuracy of the GPS of the person who placed the cache and that of the person searching for it.
The good caches are rather like a puzzle. The cache is hidden inside a fencepost or under a rock or something. The description of the cache includes clues to solving the puzzle.
Also, the contents of the caches are sometimes interesting. Items from one cache are taken and put in others. Some things ("travel bugs") can be tracked on the web from cache to cache.
Some people will just never get sly humor. The difference between the 'K' menu (or the GNOME Foot menu) and the Windows 'Start' menu is, of course, that the 'K' menu doesn't say 'Start.' So it makes slightly more sense to use it for stopping the computer.
Or maybe we should give up and replace the 'On/Off' switch with a 'Stop/Off' switch.
I do care about what the state of Israel is doing though
But you don't seem to care about what the state of Palestine is doing.
I don't wish to take sides here, but I wonder: How many times would they have to blow up public markets and schoolbusses full of children in your country before you and yours would be calling for their annihilation?
Honestly, the fact that most Isrealis are only calling for unilateral separation (the Berlin Wall 2, as you put it) is pure benevolence in my opinion.
How does the BSD license guarantee that the improvements made to the code, remain available to everyone who wants to benefit from them? It doesn't.
Of course it doesn't. I never made the claim that it did.
Explain to me again, how this still is a better license, when the code was closed off after improvements were made?
I shall not explain it to you again because I never made the claim the first time. So now I will reiterate: My code cannot be closed off. If somebody copies my code and changes it, then won't release the new code, that's their code that's closed off, not mine.
What if it takes you 2 years (alone) to match what "Some Company, Inc." took 2 months and 10 programmers to do?
So what if it does? I don't see where they owe me anything. It's like giving a gift to someone on the condition that they give me a gift in return. Not much of a gift, is it?
I BSD license my code. This is my gift to the world. I expect nothing in return.
As Stallman is often quick to point out: Software can be copied freely and nobody loses. This is chiefly how P2P song-swappers justify their activities.
If somebody takes my BSDL code and sells it, unchanged, for a million dollars, I haven't lost anything. I still have my code, so nobody has robbed me of anything! I might even get a good laugh at the expense of the poor sap who paid big money for what could have been his freely had he come to me. No matter -- his loss, not mine.
If you use the BSD license in your code, any company can . . . [close] off your code.
This is absolutely a lie. Unless that company were to pay me a considerable amount of money, that BSD licensed code is not coming off of my ftp server, where anyone can still get it for free in every sense of the word. This says nothing of any copies that others have downloaded and might be hosting elsewhere.
There is no way in the world that any company or individual can reverse my license. If they use my code and make changes or improvements and sell the result, then all they are charging for is the difference between their offering and mine, since mine is BSD-licensed, and therefore, free.
My code cannot be "closed off" or "taken" from me! My license ensures that what I wrote will always be free.
Why do you think that there are so many more leechers than there are sharers on the P2P networks? What makes you think that someone is going to fund the giving-away of the software that they paid good money for?
I'm not sure what you are trying to prove by saying this. Doesn't the fact that there are sharers on P2P networks prove that someone is, in fact, willing to do it?
The fact that there aren't very many compared to leechers doesn't seem to slow distribution much.
[Right to Be Heard] implies the right of others to listen to whomever they want to.
I disagree. The "Right to Be Heard" implies that if we speak, there must be somebody to listen, since that is our right. The "Right to Listen" or "Right to Hear" implies rather that we may listen to others at our descretion.
Think of it this way: I do not have the "Right to a Thousand Dollars," since this would mean that somebody must give me a thousand dollars. It is, after all, my right. People do, however, have the right to give me a thousand dollars (feel free!).
Or rather think of it like: If I say, "I have a Right to Be Heard," it sounds somewhat like people aren't listening to me and I'm upset about it. If I, however, say, "You have a Right to Hear Me," it then sounds as if someone's ability to seek my opinion has been censored, which would be a violation of their rights, not mine.
So the Right of Free Speech does not imply the Right to Be Heard. I would rather say that, in order to be an effective right, Free Speech requires the Right to Listen.
The fact that you needed to place a space in there for that to even appear make any sense is, to me at least, yet another indication of the essential absurdity of the "GNU/whatever" moniker.
I left RH because I didn't like the GUI config tools - I like to hack on the init.d scripts to make them do just what I want.
Then why didn't you do that? Or did your copy of RedHat come with a gun and instructions to hold it to your own head and force yourself to use the GUI tools?
I, for my part, use the GUI tools where they serve, and edit the configs and scripts when the GUI falls short. No problems.
Disagreement about a philosophical or political ideology does not make someone an idiot.
A stronger indication of "idiocy," per se, might be in using purely invective arguments against philosophical or political opponents. This, by the way, is what you have just done.
But anonymous speech *is* allowed. And I'm allowed to ignore it. And a lot of other people are likely to ignore it as well. This is just what Arandir is saying.
Nobody is saying that you should be forced to include your credentials. But you shouldn't imply that everyone else should be forced to pay attention to anonymous opinions.
Anonymous political speech *is* kind of pointless, in as much as it is not very effective.
Slashdot Mirror
By the looks of it AC needs to fine-tune his FAQ-reading skills.
Upgrade to what?
The hard copy of this article is in the November 17 issue. (I read it -- it's in our lunch room.) You may be sure that the RHEnterprise/Fedora split was not official when it was written.
These articles must be submitted at least a month or two in advance of printing. RH9 was certainly the latest officially available at that time.
Do you know anybody who's addicted to the tomatoes in McDonald's burgers?
If your undo stack has items 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5, then how would you undo item 3 and leave 4 and 5 intact?
Well, if GNU is not Unix, isn't the distinction explicit?
The good caches are rather like a puzzle. The cache is hidden inside a fencepost or under a rock or something. The description of the cache includes clues to solving the puzzle.
Also, the contents of the caches are sometimes interesting. Items from one cache are taken and put in others. Some things ("travel bugs") can be tracked on the web from cache to cache.
All in all, it's a lot of fun.
Egad! That's informative. I had no idea. Thanks.
At least someone saw the intended humour...
I think you've blown your cover.
I was able to do this with Sawfish+GNOME. Similarly, if you can do it in KDE, it is most likely a function of the window manager, not of KDE proper.
Some people will just never get sly humor. The difference between the 'K' menu (or the GNOME Foot menu) and the Windows 'Start' menu is, of course, that the 'K' menu doesn't say 'Start.' So it makes slightly more sense to use it for stopping the computer.
Or maybe we should give up and replace the 'On/Off' switch with a 'Stop/Off' switch.
But you don't seem to care about what the state of Palestine is doing.
I don't wish to take sides here, but I wonder: How many times would they have to blow up public markets and schoolbusses full of children in your country before you and yours would be calling for their annihilation?
Honestly, the fact that most Isrealis are only calling for unilateral separation (the Berlin Wall 2, as you put it) is pure benevolence in my opinion.
Of course it doesn't. I never made the claim that it did.
Explain to me again, how this still is a better license, when the code was closed off after improvements were made?
I shall not explain it to you again because I never made the claim the first time. So now I will reiterate: My code cannot be closed off. If somebody copies my code and changes it, then won't release the new code, that's their code that's closed off, not mine.
What if it takes you 2 years (alone) to match what "Some Company, Inc." took 2 months and 10 programmers to do?
So what if it does? I don't see where they owe me anything. It's like giving a gift to someone on the condition that they give me a gift in return. Not much of a gift, is it?
I BSD license my code. This is my gift to the world. I expect nothing in return.
Robs me of what, exactly?
As Stallman is often quick to point out: Software can be copied freely and nobody loses. This is chiefly how P2P song-swappers justify their activities.
If somebody takes my BSDL code and sells it, unchanged, for a million dollars, I haven't lost anything. I still have my code, so nobody has robbed me of anything! I might even get a good laugh at the expense of the poor sap who paid big money for what could have been his freely had he come to me. No matter -- his loss, not mine.
This is absolutely a lie. Unless that company were to pay me a considerable amount of money, that BSD licensed code is not coming off of my ftp server, where anyone can still get it for free in every sense of the word. This says nothing of any copies that others have downloaded and might be hosting elsewhere.
There is no way in the world that any company or individual can reverse my license. If they use my code and make changes or improvements and sell the result, then all they are charging for is the difference between their offering and mine, since mine is BSD-licensed, and therefore, free.
My code cannot be "closed off" or "taken" from me! My license ensures that what I wrote will always be free.
I'm not sure what you are trying to prove by saying this. Doesn't the fact that there are sharers on P2P networks prove that someone is, in fact, willing to do it?
The fact that there aren't very many compared to leechers doesn't seem to slow distribution much.
Wait.
I disagree. The "Right to Be Heard" implies that if we speak, there must be somebody to listen, since that is our right. The "Right to Listen" or "Right to Hear" implies rather that we may listen to others at our descretion.
Think of it this way: I do not have the "Right to a Thousand Dollars," since this would mean that somebody must give me a thousand dollars. It is, after all, my right. People do, however, have the right to give me a thousand dollars (feel free!).
Or rather think of it like: If I say, "I have a Right to Be Heard," it sounds somewhat like people aren't listening to me and I'm upset about it. If I, however, say, "You have a Right to Hear Me," it then sounds as if someone's ability to seek my opinion has been censored, which would be a violation of their rights, not mine.
So the Right of Free Speech does not imply the Right to Be Heard. I would rather say that, in order to be an effective right, Free Speech requires the Right to Listen.
No, it does not. Unless you think that the Free Speech right also implies a right to coerce others to listen.
The fact that you needed to place a space in there for that to even appear make any sense is, to me at least, yet another indication of the essential absurdity of the "GNU/whatever" moniker.
Has anyone even come up with a theoretical exploit that could do this. Maybe they have, but I've never heard of it.
Wow. This has drifted off-topic.
Then why didn't you do that? Or did your copy of RedHat come with a gun and instructions to hold it to your own head and force yourself to use the GUI tools?
I, for my part, use the GUI tools where they serve, and edit the configs and scripts when the GUI falls short. No problems.
A stronger indication of "idiocy," per se, might be in using purely invective arguments against philosophical or political opponents. This, by the way, is what you have just done.
Wait.
Nobody is saying that you should be forced to include your credentials. But you shouldn't imply that everyone else should be forced to pay attention to anonymous opinions.
Anonymous political speech *is* kind of pointless, in as much as it is not very effective.