Would have been better if you removed your bias, but you did well resisting it in any case.
It is true that GPL advocates consider it important that the user of the software be able to modify the software and redistribute the results.. and that includes the copies of the software the are embedded in some other software.
Failure to check for a buffer overflow is an error. It doesn't matter if someone else will do it for you and, as such, the error will never result in a problem for someone. It's simply wrong.
No.. it suggests that you don't need evidence to convict someone.. just convict everyone and you'll find out if they're guilty because they'll soon confess if you make it game-theoretically advantageous to do so. Back in the 16th century they'd torture you until you did and they'd be happy with that. Now-a-days they cut you a "deal" if you do. The problem with both theories, as valid as they are, is that the innocent have no way out. We can never let them go because they can never show they are innocent, they can only show they are guilty.
There's nothing wrong with monetizing the network and allowing people to compete, but that's not what they are doing. They are giving exclusive access to the network to a particular telco.. and the other telcos are suing them because of it.
No, dude, it didn't. He didn't need to explain his behavior. The only reason why his testimony was the final nail in his coffin is because the jury care more about how eloquent he is compared to the DA or his lawyer or the judge. That's wrong. That shouldn't be an issue. It's just like if he was convicted because he was black or because he had a nose ring. The evidence is all that should matter and he should have walked free simply because the police should not have arrested him until they had found the body or even some good evidence - "suspicious behavior" should not be enough. The justice system dodged a bullet here.
1. Municipality pays half the cost to get fiber run to them. 2. A selected telco pays the other half. 3. In exchange, they get exclusive access to the cable to provide Internet to customers in that town. 4. All the other telcos are suing the municipality for not allowing them access.
What part of "subsidization" don't you understand?
The municipalities are gifting the lines to a single telco.. the other telcos are suing them for preferential treatment.. can't you understand that the story is being reported poorly?
Read the quotes in the article and ignore the hyperbole and bias. Read what the people involved are actually saying. Read between the freakin' lines.
That's why rural areas to get broadband at all have to do it themselves.
Seriously, do you actually think that these local governments are doing it themselves? They're not. They're borrowing money and paying a telco to do it for them. That's why we're talking about subsidization.
Know what you're talking about before talking about it.
Yeah, cause its not like these municipalities are trying to say who can use the fiber that they want to build to connect their citizens to the Internet. Oh wait, yes they are. This would be like building a nice new highway, and getting Ford to pay part of the cost, and only allowing people with Fords to drive on it. [Slashdot car analogy at its finest].
Municipalities want to pay for fiber to connect them to the metropolis? Fine. But that fiber has to be open for everyone. They don't get to play favorites with the telcos.
Slashdot Mirror
Watch what happens next time Apple changes hardware platforms. Watch how LONG it takes them.
Would have been better if you removed your bias, but you did well resisting it in any case.
It is true that GPL advocates consider it important that the user of the software be able to modify the software and redistribute the results.. and that includes the copies of the software the are embedded in some other software.
Failure to check for a buffer overflow is an error. It doesn't matter if someone else will do it for you and, as such, the error will never result in a problem for someone. It's simply wrong.
yacc is not a compiler,
Excuse me?
Yet Another Compiler Compiler most definitely is a compiler.
If you overflow a buffer then it's a bug, whether it is exploitable or not.
No.. it suggests that you don't need evidence to convict someone.. just convict everyone and you'll find out if they're guilty because they'll soon confess if you make it game-theoretically advantageous to do so. Back in the 16th century they'd torture you until you did and they'd be happy with that. Now-a-days they cut you a "deal" if you do. The problem with both theories, as valid as they are, is that the innocent have no way out. We can never let them go because they can never show they are innocent, they can only show they are guilty.
huh?
The jury convicted him on his personality. They even said so.
There's nothing wrong with monetizing the network and allowing people to compete, but that's not what they are doing. They are giving exclusive access to the network to a particular telco.. and the other telcos are suing them because of it.
No, dude, it didn't. He didn't need to explain his behavior. The only reason why his testimony was the final nail in his coffin is because the jury care more about how eloquent he is compared to the DA or his lawyer or the judge. That's wrong. That shouldn't be an issue. It's just like if he was convicted because he was black or because he had a nose ring. The evidence is all that should matter and he should have walked free simply because the police should not have arrested him until they had found the body or even some good evidence - "suspicious behavior" should not be enough. The justice system dodged a bullet here.
Umm no. It was part of the DA's case that Hans moved the body. So he likely bought the book to figure out how best to hide the body.
All you do is convict everyone and eventually they'll admit their guilt.
Oh wait, I think they used to do that in the 16th century, never mind.
Stupidity runs in your family doesn't it?
I'll spell it out for you:
1. Municipality pays half the cost to get fiber run to them.
2. A selected telco pays the other half.
3. In exchange, they get exclusive access to the cable to provide Internet to customers in that town.
4. All the other telcos are suing the municipality for not allowing them access.
What is so fucking hard to understand about that?
Are you brain dead?
What part of "subsidization" don't you understand?
The municipalities are gifting the lines to a single telco.. the other telcos are suing them for preferential treatment.. can't you understand that the story is being reported poorly?
Read the quotes in the article and ignore the hyperbole and bias. Read what the people involved are actually saying. Read between the freakin' lines.
OK, here's a serious answer: his guilt or innocence does not, in any way, change the fact that he was convicted on scant evidence.
It's not the destination that matters, it's the journey. A broken system can send an innocent man to jail as easily as a guilty one.
No, are you an idiot? You have half the story and you think you know it all.
And like any municipal service (power, water, etc.) the citizens pay for it and anyone who pays bills gets it.
And steak comes from the supermarket.
Think for yourself.
That's why rural areas to get broadband at all have to do it themselves.
Seriously, do you actually think that these local governments are doing it themselves? They're not. They're borrowing money and paying a telco to do it for them. That's why we're talking about subsidization.
Know what you're talking about before talking about it.
Yes, and the bits will get from their fiber to the Internet via MAGIC.
You obviously have gotten everything you know about this issue from the article, which is poor on details.
The Municipalities are cutting deals with Telcos. They are playing favorites.
Yeah, cause its not like these municipalities are trying to say who can use the fiber that they want to build to connect their citizens to the Internet. Oh wait, yes they are. This would be like building a nice new highway, and getting Ford to pay part of the cost, and only allowing people with Fords to drive on it. [Slashdot car analogy at its finest].
A fictional teenage boy.
Municipalities want to pay for fiber to connect them to the metropolis? Fine. But that fiber has to be open for everyone. They don't get to play favorites with the telcos.
I'd rather have my body rejuvenated and enhanced than replace it with the shoddy technology of the 20th century.
Ya know, if you guys keep this up, people are going to start thinking that Americans can't take a joke.
It's even moderated funny.. lighten up.
The rest of the world has moved on, but it's good to see third world countries (and the United States) clinging to this ancient technology.
Everyone else gets the sarcasm, what's wrong with you?