While I agree that NC is generally misunderstood by lay licensors, and greatly more restrictive than most people realise, ND has a valuable place in the licensing suite. For example, if you write an opinion piece, adding the ND clause will make sure that no-one can (legitimately) alter or distort the text, and use it to misrepresent the position you hold/held.
Otherwise, using ND for non-opinion works shows a certain amount of arrogance. It's effectively proclaiming "no one but myself could possibly make this any better".
You don't have to have the source to modify it, it just makes it dramatically easier.
"We're not stopping blacks from voting! They just have to fight their way past the KKK barricade around the polling station."
Re:will not stop repeating the obvious
on
Patents That Kill
·
· Score: 1
Moore's law doesn't suffer under the current regime, because Moore's law was written within the current regime. There's no telling what would happen, or what would have happened, in the microelectronics industry without the current patent rules. Perhaps Moore's law would have been "...doubles every 6 months", instead of 18 or 24 months?
What products covered by "dozens if not hundreds of patents belonging to dozens or more different companies" do is encourage collusion and anti-competitive practices, and even in the absence of abuse massively raise the bar for new entrants to the market (aka competition).
Does your country have laws protecting corporate whistle-blowers? It's a lot easier to defend your position if it's the FBI asking you to make surreptitious copies of documents, after they called you following an "anonymous" tip-off...
Because: 1. It's not initially feature-compatible with OpenSSL 2. While there is momentum, it's faster to work apart from the existing project. 3. There's no guarantee the rewrite would be accepted by the OpenSSL team 4. There's no guarantee LibreSSL will work on anything but BSD 5. Theo doesn't control OpenSSL
Personally, my hopes are: 1. This Linux Foundation fund identify LibreSSL as the most feasible solution in the long-term, and provide support for both projects. 2. Important bugs identified by both teams are ported to patch the current OpenSSL release. 3. LibreSSL gains feature parity with OpenSSL. 4. LibreSSL becomes OpenSSL v2, under the stewardship of a healthier OpenSSL community.
The information in those demonstrations is trivial and hardly helpful once put to the test. People will panic and that means that little boring sermon will mean almost nothing where it counts.(as always happens)
Perhaps we should be campaigning for people to undergo aircraft-emergency simulations? You're right that people panic, but people only panic because the situation is unusual. If people regularly experience "emergency" situations without the danger/fear (especially throughout childhood), they can be trained in what to do enough that handling a real emergency becomes routine and practically instinctual.
So what do you do about colleagues in other time-zones? Or on other shifts? Are they not allowed to email you outside of the times you're both at work - assuming there is any overlap at all?
Email is not IM; it's not designed to require or expect an immediate response. Nothing about sending an email necessitates that it must be acted upon immediately.
For storing and querying arbitrarily-structured data, which is what the submitter seems to be wanting, a traditional relational SQL database is not necessarily the best way to do it.
And if anything, MongoDB is easier to start using than any relational database, IME. No need to create databases, schemas, or tables (collections) beforehand - you just install MongoDB, start writing data, and it gets stored.
MongoDB has indexes. MongoDB also lets you store and query arbitrary data, in addition to any "key fields", without having to pre-define all the possible fields. Which it seems is what the submitter asked for.
Where has this idea that "NoSQL" means "not a database" come from?
Short version: They have a perfectly working computer with all their stuff on it. Why should they have to throw it in the trash and go through all the pain/expense of an "upgrade"?
Not to mention that, for many people, Windows XP is the only desktop operating system they've ever known. XP has been around for 13 years. In consumer technology, that's an incredible length of time. After so many years of consistency, of course there are going to be people - millions of them - who don't want to face change.
In the end it will also not matter, because when these people reach the distant location, there will be no compatible civilization on earth left.
People don't generally think of multi-millennium cryo-sleeper journeys as a "there and back" deal, so the state of any civilization on Earth would be pretty much moot once they wake up at the destination. That is, unless Earth has advanced so much that FTL Earth ships arrived at the destination before the sleepers did. In which case; "welcome to the world of tomorrow!"
There is no point in deep space travel as long as we are not able to go faster than light or at least close to light speed.
Perhaps no point for those staying behind, no. But for the pioneers, however long the journey takes, they may well become the first humans to explore and colonise a new planet and star system. If you honestly think that such an amazing achievement is entirely pointless, then I think you might be on the wrong website.
So an "official" SN account has denied this being the "real" SN. The question I ask is: Why didn't that "official" account post a denial for each of the other times someone has been suggested to be "the guy"? Why does this Satoshi Nakamoto get a denial, and not the others?
Thought experiment: Remember that guy at Tiananmen Square? If you're not Chinese, you probably know who I mean. Would you consider it "ethical" for an American newspaper to publicise his new identity, location, family, etc.? What if it then turns out that wasn't the guy after all? Do you consider it "ethical" to publicise all the details about some random citizen, and - at the very best - turn their life upside down, just because some journalist thinks they're probably someone important, due to finding some circumstantial evidence?
"In the public interest" is not the same thing as "interesting to the public".
Perhaps about the same amount that isn't being reflected from those areas of the world where snowfall has been at a record low this winter. Like here in the arctic.
So the real story is that the Police Department in question had an outstanding arrest warrant against someone whose address they knew (the court had sent her several certified letters), and they did nothing about it for nine years?
That's the point of a protest though; to get the attention of people who might otherwise not notice that there is a problem. They are effectively picketing slashdot; inconveniencing the normal readers like you and I, to put pressure on the management to take their protest more seriously, and offer something more than just platitudes and empty promises.
As someone who touch-types Dvorak at home, and has to switch back to QWERTY at work, I think I can safely say my experience trumps your few symbol keys moving around...
I'd argue that no, it actually doesn't trump it. IME it is *far* easier to switch between two completely different systems, than to switch between two systems which are exactly the same, except for one or two minor parameters.
Consider a Brit, who fluently speak both English and Russian, conversing with two people; one of whom speaks Russian, and only Russian; the other speaks US English, and only US English. When speaking with the Russian, the Brit's brain need switch to and maintain Russian only once. When speaking to the USian, the Brit can speak in their native tongue - except when certain words come up, which the brain must anticipate, and engage to translate those to US English.
Indeed. I see a lot of assertions that Ulbricht was "The Dread Pirate Roberts", and in this article that he was the "founder". Has Ulbricht actually been found - in a court of law - to be either, or confessed to being so? Not so far as I've heard. There's a lot of accusations flying from government agencies, which are then repeated verbatim by "news" agencies who are more interested in a dramatic story than accuracy or facts.
However, the phrase "... shall dispose of the bitcoins... according to law" is pretty much a non-statement. They're hardly going to say "we're going to sell them off illegally". What they will do all depends on what the law says, and it may well say they can't do jack until and unless the accused is found guilty, and the assets found to be the proceeds of crime. That said, it is entirely possible that his assets could be lawfully siezed and disposed of by US law enforcement at this point, since they apparently have the legal power to do so when they suspect or accuse someone of a crime, in certain circumstances/jurisdictions.
I don't know why WASD "won" (people say "AWSD"? Really?), but I've never played a game which had ESDF as the default. I've never even *heard* of a game which had a pre-configured option to use those keys. Not that I disagree with the advantages, however.
IF you start making it to where a company has to pay for the bandwidth of its users, then you raise the barrier of entry. Not good for innovation.
Internet companies already pay for the bandwidth of their users - all incoming and outgoing traffic to a data centre is bandwidth which the data centre must pay their internet provider to carry.
Slashdot Mirror
While I agree that NC is generally misunderstood by lay licensors, and greatly more restrictive than most people realise, ND has a valuable place in the licensing suite.
For example, if you write an opinion piece, adding the ND clause will make sure that no-one can (legitimately) alter or distort the text, and use it to misrepresent the position you hold/held.
Otherwise, using ND for non-opinion works shows a certain amount of arrogance. It's effectively proclaiming "no one but myself could possibly make this any better".
"We're not stopping blacks from voting! They just have to fight their way past the KKK barricade around the polling station."
Moore's law doesn't suffer under the current regime, because Moore's law was written within the current regime. There's no telling what would happen, or what would have happened, in the microelectronics industry without the current patent rules. Perhaps Moore's law would have been "...doubles every 6 months", instead of 18 or 24 months?
What products covered by "dozens if not hundreds of patents belonging to dozens or more different companies" do is encourage collusion and anti-competitive practices, and even in the absence of abuse massively raise the bar for new entrants to the market (aka competition).
Does your country have laws protecting corporate whistle-blowers?
It's a lot easier to defend your position if it's the FBI asking you to make surreptitious copies of documents, after they called you following an "anonymous" tip-off...
Well, sir, there's nothing on earth like a genuine, bona fide, electrified, one-car, SkyTran!
What'd I say?
SkyTran!
What's it called?
SkyTran!
He's famous enough to have a Wikipedia page, which IME is a reasonably high bar for someone who isn't an anime character.
I think it's more along the lines of: "Pay for a membership to our Legitimate Businessman's Social Club, or we'll run you out of town."
Because:
1. It's not initially feature-compatible with OpenSSL
2. While there is momentum, it's faster to work apart from the existing project.
3. There's no guarantee the rewrite would be accepted by the OpenSSL team
4. There's no guarantee LibreSSL will work on anything but BSD
5. Theo doesn't control OpenSSL
Personally, my hopes are:
1. This Linux Foundation fund identify LibreSSL as the most feasible solution in the long-term, and provide support for both projects.
2. Important bugs identified by both teams are ported to patch the current OpenSSL release.
3. LibreSSL gains feature parity with OpenSSL.
4. LibreSSL becomes OpenSSL v2, under the stewardship of a healthier OpenSSL community.
Perhaps we should be campaigning for people to undergo aircraft-emergency simulations?
You're right that people panic, but people only panic because the situation is unusual. If people regularly experience "emergency" situations without the danger/fear (especially throughout childhood), they can be trained in what to do enough that handling a real emergency becomes routine and practically instinctual.
So what do you do about colleagues in other time-zones? Or on other shifts? Are they not allowed to email you outside of the times you're both at work - assuming there is any overlap at all?
Email is not IM; it's not designed to require or expect an immediate response. Nothing about sending an email necessitates that it must be acted upon immediately.
For storing and querying arbitrarily-structured data, which is what the submitter seems to be wanting, a traditional relational SQL database is not necessarily the best way to do it.
And if anything, MongoDB is easier to start using than any relational database, IME. No need to create databases, schemas, or tables (collections) beforehand - you just install MongoDB, start writing data, and it gets stored.
MongoDB has indexes.
MongoDB also lets you store and query arbitrary data, in addition to any "key fields", without having to pre-define all the possible fields. Which it seems is what the submitter asked for.
Where has this idea that "NoSQL" means "not a database" come from?
Not to mention that, for many people, Windows XP is the only desktop operating system they've ever known.
XP has been around for 13 years. In consumer technology, that's an incredible length of time. After so many years of consistency, of course there are going to be people - millions of them - who don't want to face change.
I like Redmine, I do, but it has no support for actually being a source control server. On its own, browsing local repositories is all you get.
People don't generally think of multi-millennium cryo-sleeper journeys as a "there and back" deal, so the state of any civilization on Earth would be pretty much moot once they wake up at the destination.
That is, unless Earth has advanced so much that FTL Earth ships arrived at the destination before the sleepers did. In which case; "welcome to the world of tomorrow!"
Perhaps no point for those staying behind, no. But for the pioneers, however long the journey takes, they may well become the first humans to explore and colonise a new planet and star system. If you honestly think that such an amazing achievement is entirely pointless, then I think you might be on the wrong website.
So an "official" SN account has denied this being the "real" SN.
The question I ask is: Why didn't that "official" account post a denial for each of the other times someone has been suggested to be "the guy"? Why does this Satoshi Nakamoto get a denial, and not the others?
Methinks he does protest too much.
Thought experiment: Remember that guy at Tiananmen Square? If you're not Chinese, you probably know who I mean. Would you consider it "ethical" for an American newspaper to publicise his new identity, location, family, etc.?
What if it then turns out that wasn't the guy after all? Do you consider it "ethical" to publicise all the details about some random citizen, and - at the very best - turn their life upside down, just because some journalist thinks they're probably someone important, due to finding some circumstantial evidence?
"In the public interest" is not the same thing as "interesting to the public".
Perhaps about the same amount that isn't being reflected from those areas of the world where snowfall has been at a record low this winter. Like here in the arctic.
So the real story is that the Police Department in question had an outstanding arrest warrant against someone whose address they knew (the court had sent her several certified letters), and they did nothing about it for nine years?
That's the point of a protest though; to get the attention of people who might otherwise not notice that there is a problem.
They are effectively picketing slashdot; inconveniencing the normal readers like you and I, to put pressure on the management to take their protest more seriously, and offer something more than just platitudes and empty promises.
jQuery is the PHP of Javascript frameworks.
I'd argue that no, it actually doesn't trump it.
IME it is *far* easier to switch between two completely different systems, than to switch between two systems which are exactly the same, except for one or two minor parameters.
Consider a Brit, who fluently speak both English and Russian, conversing with two people; one of whom speaks Russian, and only Russian; the other speaks US English, and only US English. When speaking with the Russian, the Brit's brain need switch to and maintain Russian only once. When speaking to the USian, the Brit can speak in their native tongue - except when certain words come up, which the brain must anticipate, and engage to translate those to US English.
Indeed. I see a lot of assertions that Ulbricht was "The Dread Pirate Roberts", and in this article that he was the "founder". Has Ulbricht actually been found - in a court of law - to be either, or confessed to being so? Not so far as I've heard. There's a lot of accusations flying from government agencies, which are then repeated verbatim by "news" agencies who are more interested in a dramatic story than accuracy or facts.
However, the phrase "... shall dispose of the bitcoins ... according to law" is pretty much a non-statement. They're hardly going to say "we're going to sell them off illegally". What they will do all depends on what the law says, and it may well say they can't do jack until and unless the accused is found guilty, and the assets found to be the proceeds of crime.
That said, it is entirely possible that his assets could be lawfully siezed and disposed of by US law enforcement at this point, since they apparently have the legal power to do so when they suspect or accuse someone of a crime, in certain circumstances/jurisdictions.
I don't know why WASD "won" (people say "AWSD"? Really?), but I've never played a game which had ESDF as the default. I've never even *heard* of a game which had a pre-configured option to use those keys. Not that I disagree with the advantages, however.
But back in my day, ZX*? was the standard.
Internet companies already pay for the bandwidth of their users - all incoming and outgoing traffic to a data centre is bandwidth which the data centre must pay their internet provider to carry.