Barring the very small amount of new content Netflix funds, most of that massive library you have access to has already been paid for through traditional means.
In the UK you can buy "red fuel" which has a much lower tax than fuel used for vehicles on public roads - its specifically for farm machinery, generators etc etc.
I'm afraid not even the FCC is god - this is going to court, mark my words. Unilaterally changing the rules of a multi billion dollar market? Yeah, not without a decade of fighting.
It remains to be seen whether this is legally binding or not - just declaring an existing, established market to suddenly, over night be regulated under a title which has existed alongside that market for decades? That's ripe for a legal battle if I have ever seen one.
The CoreCLR is under the MIT license, is that open enough for you? Mono is a mixture of MIT X11, GPL, LGPL and commercial, so it looks like Xamarian can take from the CoreCLR but CoreCLR can't take from Mono.
The.Net CoreCLR is a rewrite of the.Net CLR from the ground up to support the specifics of the vNext project, so the Xamarian project isn't a good fit for this either as they would still need to start from scratch. Xamarian will still cover the entire CLR as it currently does (with some exceptions to the base class libraries), while the CoreCLR platform is a hugely stripped down and optimised runtime designed to be deployed with individual apps.
For example, at the moment you deploy a.Net web app to IIS and it uses the.Net runtime installed server wide (in the GAC). With Mono, you deploy it to Apache and tell Apache to use the Mono runtime - but that is still Apache wide, so you can't run a second version of Mono without running a second instance of Apache configured specifically.
In vNext, you deploy your web app and it comes with everything it needs to run - application code, CLR, Katana (or other OWIN implementation) and even a choice of web servers which are not dependent on the target server. This means you can run different versions of.Net for different applications, and can upgrade some without affecting others - because upgrading.Net is now as simple as redeploying the site. It also means no heavy dependency on IIS or Apache.
Thats why its not an adaptation of Xamarian, because the two are quite different - however, at the recent NDC where they announced all this, they did announce much closer ties with Xamarian to work on Mono as the full implementation of.Net cross platform, so Xamarian aren't being left out to dry.
Why would MS want to gift anything to FOSS as a whole? This isn't a case of joining one huge orgy, you can participate in open source in very select ways and areas without ever intending to support the entirety of the movement.
Where did this myth that looking at code would expose you to legal issues come from? Has any court case actually gone through which hinged on a developer "poisoning" themselves for all eternity by looking at a competitors code base? I certainly haven't heard of any - even the original Compaq team did clean room implementations of the IBM Bios purely as a legal belt and braces, it wasn't based on any legal rulings in place.
Microsoft Patent Promise for.NET Libraries and Runtime Components
Microsoft Corporation and its affiliates ("Microsoft") promise not to assert any.NET Patents against you for making, using, selling, offering for sale, importing, or distributing Covered Code, as part of either a.NET Runtime or as part of any application designed to run on a.NET Runtime.
Permission is hereby granted, free of charge, to any person obtaining a copy of this software and associated documentation files (the "Software"), to deal in the Software without restriction, including without limitation the rights to use, copy, modify, merge, publish, distribute, sublicense, and/or sell copies of the Software, and to permit persons to whom the Software is furnished to do so, subject to the following conditions:
The above copyright notice and this permission notice shall be included in all copies or substantial portions of the Software.
A cartel implies collusion - got any evidence of that going on?
At the end of the day, music is rarely something you can replace 1:1 with another, similar product. You either like song A or song B (or both), but you cant replace song A with song B if you don't like song B. Same goes for artists, TV series, movies etc etc etc.
So competition in these areas is very very difficult - a label either has the artist, or they don't. And the label has the artist by virtue of the contract that artist willingly signed.
Yes, yes there is. Unless you can prove collusion between those 5 companies, then the market is working. It might not be doing what *you* want it to do, but it is working.
Companies are allowed monopolies over their own products, and no one label actually dominates the music industry - plus the barrier to entry to releasing your own music is very very very low.
Thats how I identify most of my email - I dont use periods in my address, every bit of the stuff I dont classify as spam but do classify as mis-addressed email (eg, the stuff mentioned in my first post) has a period in it.
I have a firstnamelastname@gmail email address (you can see it above this post), and I get a *lot* of correspondence for other me's out there - bank details, divorce proceedings, legal proceedings, a long running internal discussion surrounding someones cock up in the Republican Party in the US, internal memos for several political parties around the globe.
I've enjoyed free Netflix subscriptions (thanks!), invites to various exclusive clubs (not so great, most of them are in the US) and family meet ups. I know the progress of several children's schooling in Canada and the US, including an incident where the child was suspended for 3 days for kicking the teacher. I've had the ability to cancel several ISP connections, including business ones. Details of medical appointments and procedures, insurance documents etc etc.
I've also been threatened with legal action for simply owning the email address and not handing it over - twice now. Yes, apparently there are other me's out there that think they have a right to this email address.
So in short, without a recording of the telephone conversation, I wouldn't be so sure that it wasn't your sister that got the address wrong.
People who claim a penicillin allergy typically had a reaction during childhood and have since then had it drummed into them by their parents. However, paediatric medicine is so different to adult medicine that non-specialised doctors have to tread very carefully when treating children - you can easily have a reaction to something as a child but grow out of it in your teens or immediate pre-teen years. I had a severe reaction to penicillin as a child, but I've had it as a treatment many times since with no negative effect.
Slashdot Mirror
Barring the very small amount of new content Netflix funds, most of that massive library you have access to has already been paid for through traditional means.
In the UK I pay €50/month for unlimited text, unlimited calling and 10GB of 4G data. For two lines. Total.
What, you weren't buying medical insurance before Obamacare? I find that hard to believe...
I've lived in a society that really did have a terrorism obsession, and let me tell you - what you are experiencing today is not it.
You don't know what it is to be truly obsessed with security until you lived in Northern Ireland in the 1970s and 80s.
In the UK you can buy "red fuel" which has a much lower tax than fuel used for vehicles on public roads - its specifically for farm machinery, generators etc etc.
Jonathan Ive went to state schools. I wouldn't exactly call him poor these days.
I'm afraid not even the FCC is god - this is going to court, mark my words. Unilaterally changing the rules of a multi billion dollar market? Yeah, not without a decade of fighting.
It remains to be seen whether this is legally binding or not - just declaring an existing, established market to suddenly, over night be regulated under a title which has existed alongside that market for decades? That's ripe for a legal battle if I have ever seen one.
You could say the same about any GPL code - its open, but not really, because I can't use it in something non-GPL...
Nope, followed that very closely, developer poisoning was not part of that case.
Yes. Its a tool to be used, nothing else.
The GPL would have put a lot of other people off - part of the point of the CoreCLR is so you can push out a custom CLR with your own app.
The CoreCLR is under the MIT license, is that open enough for you? Mono is a mixture of MIT X11, GPL, LGPL and commercial, so it looks like Xamarian can take from the CoreCLR but CoreCLR can't take from Mono.
The .Net CoreCLR is a rewrite of the .Net CLR from the ground up to support the specifics of the vNext project, so the Xamarian project isn't a good fit for this either as they would still need to start from scratch. Xamarian will still cover the entire CLR as it currently does (with some exceptions to the base class libraries), while the CoreCLR platform is a hugely stripped down and optimised runtime designed to be deployed with individual apps.
For example, at the moment you deploy a .Net web app to IIS and it uses the .Net runtime installed server wide (in the GAC). With Mono, you deploy it to Apache and tell Apache to use the Mono runtime - but that is still Apache wide, so you can't run a second version of Mono without running a second instance of Apache configured specifically.
In vNext, you deploy your web app and it comes with everything it needs to run - application code, CLR, Katana (or other OWIN implementation) and even a choice of web servers which are not dependent on the target server. This means you can run different versions of .Net for different applications, and can upgrade some without affecting others - because upgrading .Net is now as simple as redeploying the site. It also means no heavy dependency on IIS or Apache.
Thats why its not an adaptation of Xamarian, because the two are quite different - however, at the recent NDC where they announced all this, they did announce much closer ties with Xamarian to work on Mono as the full implementation of .Net cross platform, so Xamarian aren't being left out to dry.
Why would MS want to gift anything to FOSS as a whole? This isn't a case of joining one huge orgy, you can participate in open source in very select ways and areas without ever intending to support the entirety of the movement.
Where did this myth that looking at code would expose you to legal issues come from? Has any court case actually gone through which hinged on a developer "poisoning" themselves for all eternity by looking at a competitors code base? I certainly haven't heard of any - even the original Compaq team did clean room implementations of the IBM Bios purely as a legal belt and braces, it wasn't based on any legal rulings in place.
Promissory Estoppel makes it legally binding, new CEO or not.
That doesn't imply collusion, any more than unions do.
https://github.com/dotnet/core...
https://github.com/dotnet/core...
If you weren't so hung up on flogging a dead horse for mod points, MS has covered patents and licensing in the codebase itself.
A cartel implies collusion - got any evidence of that going on?
At the end of the day, music is rarely something you can replace 1:1 with another, similar product. You either like song A or song B (or both), but you cant replace song A with song B if you don't like song B. Same goes for artists, TV series, movies etc etc etc.
So competition in these areas is very very difficult - a label either has the artist, or they don't. And the label has the artist by virtue of the contract that artist willingly signed.
Yes, yes there is. Unless you can prove collusion between those 5 companies, then the market is working. It might not be doing what *you* want it to do, but it is working.
Companies are allowed monopolies over their own products, and no one label actually dominates the music industry - plus the barrier to entry to releasing your own music is very very very low.
Thats how I identify most of my email - I dont use periods in my address, every bit of the stuff I dont classify as spam but do classify as mis-addressed email (eg, the stuff mentioned in my first post) has a period in it.
I have a firstnamelastname@gmail email address (you can see it above this post), and I get a *lot* of correspondence for other me's out there - bank details, divorce proceedings, legal proceedings, a long running internal discussion surrounding someones cock up in the Republican Party in the US, internal memos for several political parties around the globe.
I've enjoyed free Netflix subscriptions (thanks!), invites to various exclusive clubs (not so great, most of them are in the US) and family meet ups. I know the progress of several children's schooling in Canada and the US, including an incident where the child was suspended for 3 days for kicking the teacher. I've had the ability to cancel several ISP connections, including business ones. Details of medical appointments and procedures, insurance documents etc etc.
I've also been threatened with legal action for simply owning the email address and not handing it over - twice now. Yes, apparently there are other me's out there that think they have a right to this email address.
So in short, without a recording of the telephone conversation, I wouldn't be so sure that it wasn't your sister that got the address wrong.
People who claim a penicillin allergy typically had a reaction during childhood and have since then had it drummed into them by their parents. However, paediatric medicine is so different to adult medicine that non-specialised doctors have to tread very carefully when treating children - you can easily have a reaction to something as a child but grow out of it in your teens or immediate pre-teen years. I had a severe reaction to penicillin as a child, but I've had it as a treatment many times since with no negative effect.