The US is bound by treaty to observe certain laws, even in wartime. We haven't been following those laws precisely, and one of our defenses against those claims is that we aren't involved in a real war. The Bush administration, and it's apologists, want to play both sides of the fence.
The bit about it not mattering if you aren't a part of al-Qaeda is the same old stupid facist bullshit that the president spouts all the time and I'm sick as hell of it. It wasn't true in WW2 (no, fuckwit, abuses of the past do not excuse abuses of the present) and it's not true now. And, in fact, the whole reason why we have a rule of law instead of a rule of President is because the potential for abuse, both intentional and just through incompetence, is very high.
Even the skeptical author of TFA stated that they seemed to want non-partial editors.
Are you a retard or a shill? Seriously. What kind of naive fool would you have to be to think that the PR department of a major corporation really wants "non-partial" editing of its wiki entries? That they are going to *pay* for? And this corporation in particular, which has a well-known history of controlling press and PR about itself very tightly. I'm not surprised they're hiring someone, but don't insult anyones intelligence by suggesting that they'd be just as happy to hire someone to write negative entries. They're attempting to correct what they see as negative spin.
Nice one. In reality it was to correct information in Wikipedia that is just plain wrong.
Well, nothing that he wrote in his article is "just plain wrong". Even his very first statement - the standard *does* define those sections, it does *not* provide implementation details, and while they are "optional", it's nitpicking at best to claim that they aren't a weakness in the standard and the inability for third parties to implement them is a problem.
The article in its current state doesn't say anything about "implementing the entire 6000 pages or MS will sue" and I don't feel like digging through the history in an attempt to find where he might have seen it. It's worth noting that the MS covenant only applies to conforming implementations, and there may have more been made of that fact in older versions of the article.
His final "inaccuracy" isn't anything of the sort, it's an accurate statement that he feels is unfair. He actually spends more time talking about this one than about any of the previous "inaccuracies", which might give you some insight into how he might edit the article. His stated reason for believing it to be unfair is factually inaccurate, too, which again indicates exactly how well researched and unbiased his opinions are likely to be.
Even the most rebellious of my peers when I was that age knew better than to blame the owner of the pool hall when they let the 40 year old alcoholics who hung out there feel them up in exchange for cigarettes.
Not for entrapment, but maybe the relatives of the sex offender could sue under the law of attractive nuisance. I know, I know, it's a whole new game of blame the victim, but if you let your daughter meet random people from the internet for sex, you *are* contributing to a public hazard...
Hard drives use a standard interface. You don't need special drivers for your hard drive, only for drive controllers which are built into the XBox and thus not an issue. This is not a support issue, this is MS enjoying the closed, proprietary platform they always wanted the PC to be.
It's not new by any means. Businesses have been using RSA tokens for VPN access, and dial-up before that, for years. In (at least some parts of) Europe, online banking uses tokens. I think what's throwing you here is that they're calling them dongles and not tokens. A game using it is something new, though, and I respect Blizzard for looking at ways to try to mitigate the growing account hacking problem.
1) Only in the same sense that engineering is a branch of physics.
.
2) Boolean logic is a system. It has certain, limited, capabilities which do not include anything like the concept of jumps. You can build other systems, that do include jumps, out of boolean logic but that still doesn't mean that if and while are boolean constructs. They aren't.
They don't ignore small business, they follow the direction of their customers and the community. Quicken works fine under CrossOver, for example. If people want QuickBooks, then more than 12 people should say something. And more than 4 people should pledge something, and more than zero people should post known issues or bugs.
I don't know what they do now, but a few years ago WildTangent was on the forefront of the "here's a cool 3d app, pay no attention to our spyware" business. So this guy may very well have issues beyond "it's too hard to write game installers" now.
It is, actually, but JavaScript (or ECMAScript, this is part of the standard) has a notion of a "default object" which is the global namespace. In IE, the global namespace is the window object. This is documented (if you know where to look) and perfectly standards compliant, even if it is sometimes obnoxious.
As a hint for *your* code, due to JavaScript's stupid scoping limitations, it's best to minimize your global variables. Have a single global object with some relatively complicated name (or a global function you call to initialize an object) and expose your error and status information as part of that object.
You're going to provide a link to your credentials and all the proof you have that all the C code you've ever written is secure, right? I've never heard anyone who's well known as a C author, especially someone who's known for working on secure code, to say anything like this.
Buffer overflows are found in C code every day, even in heavily audited C code. Written by extremely skilled programmers. It *is* a fault of the language, and it's stupid to argue otherwise - it's mindless fanboyism at best. It can only be worked around by an extreme (and, as shown by real world code, unachievable) level of discipline and expertise, coupled with fallible automatic tools.
People write in C for lots of reasons. Nobody who isn't a cretin writes in it because they think it's innately secure.
It's not FUD - you seem to be claiming that it's a minor requirement and no big deal, which (as far as I know) nobody at the FSF has ever disputed. Not a big deal doesn't mean it's GPL compatible, though.
But the GPL specifies *no* additional restrictions, advertising clause is an additional restriction, end of story. That's all there is to it - 4 clause BSD license is not GPL compatible.
The PyDev extensions for Eclipse are distributed under a free license that includes the requirement that you take a deep breath and relax. That's a GPL-incompatible clause. Legal nitpicking is how you keep your house clean.
The FSF requires copyright assignment for all GNU projects (since the FSF are the owners and maintainers of the GNU project). Copyright assignment is relatively rare in the open source world, because it requires extensive and expensive legal infrastructure, not least of which is the organizational body that will actually hold the copy rights. It's also a pain for submitters, who need to send notarized copyright assignment documents.
It's the best way to keep your house legally clean, but it requires a great deal of trust and willingness from your contributors. The Linux kernel as a notable OSS project does not require copyright assignments.
Nominally OSS projects that are run (and sometimes dual-licensed) by a corporation often require copyright assignments, MySQL is an example.
Blizzard has roughly 6m accounts that pay $15 a month. That's all that matters, really - they aren't trying to count "real people" who play, and even if they did it'd be a meaningless number. What is important, from a business standpoint, is that wow has $90M coming in each month from subscribers.
I ordered a new Dell laptop for my wife recently and was pleasantly surprised to see that there's an option for media, and it doesn't even cost anything extra. Hopefully it's real media and not a stupid restore CD. We'll see when it gets here.
Does the hard drive come with a separate license explicitly entitling you to a refund if you choose not to accept the extensive post-sale license it subjects you to?
Whenever a tech writer feels like he needs a little more exposure he writes something about how programmers don't write good interfaces, and they're condescending to users. It's trivial, obvious fluff writing that people have been doing for at least 20 years. There's never anything new in the articles, and most of what *is* in them is wrong.
The equivalent Python:
for num in "12,2a,3f".split(","):
print int(num, 16)
The least obvious bit is the need to tell int() (or to_i) to use base 16.
A more exact Python version would be a list comprehension:
[int(num, 16) for num in "12,2a,3f".split(",")]
Which is slightly less readable to someone who doesn't know Python. I have only a very passing knowledge of Ruby but figured out what the snipped did without trouble.
It's worth pointing out that the lack of core strings and vectors means that every C++ library more than 5 years old has it's own implementation of them, which means hooking libraries together means you get to waste time, memory, and performance on shuffling between almost identical string and array implementations. Multiple implementations of things like strings and basic vectors is a weakness, not a strength. The ability to provide specialized implementations of these is a strength, and D has that.
Well.. unless they were to pull out some kind of unjust enrichment/ contract implied in fact claim, basically throw themselves at the judge's feet and decalre that no reasonable person would expect a lap top to be free - and that they would suffer serious financial harm if the bloggers were allowed to keep the laptops - which they probably got at a steep discount and wrote off out of petty cash.
If they sent them USPS (I'm not sure how the regulations apply to private carriers) they're out of luck. There's some USPS links elsewhere on this page, take a look at them - it's illegal to send unsolicited mail to anyone that you aren't intending to give them. If they try to get them back, they're committing felony mail fraud.
Without a *prior* contract in place, anything anyone sends to you in the mail is yours, free and clear. This is due to an old mail fraud scam, where you'd send someone magazines, or books, or whatever, and then bill them for services rendered. Shrinkwrap licenses don't work (because courts and lawmakers actually gave a shit about that kind of deceptive marketing 100 years ago).
So if Microsoft sent people a laptop, if they didn't have a contract *before they sent it*, then they just gave away laptops. That's why the Microsoft letter says "give away or return", and that's why it's just spin anyway.
Corporations don't give stuff like this away "just for fun". You can bet that it's entered on a balance sheet as "goodwill" somewhere. But you aren't supposed to be so obvious or extravagant with your bribes, so they're taking heat and they're trying to spin out of it.
Slashdot Mirror
The bit about it not mattering if you aren't a part of al-Qaeda is the same old stupid facist bullshit that the president spouts all the time and I'm sick as hell of it. It wasn't true in WW2 (no, fuckwit, abuses of the past do not excuse abuses of the present) and it's not true now. And, in fact, the whole reason why we have a rule of law instead of a rule of President is because the potential for abuse, both intentional and just through incompetence, is very high.
Are you a retard or a shill? Seriously. What kind of naive fool would you have to be to think that the PR department of a major corporation really wants "non-partial" editing of its wiki entries? That they are going to *pay* for? And this corporation in particular, which has a well-known history of controlling press and PR about itself very tightly. I'm not surprised they're hiring someone, but don't insult anyones intelligence by suggesting that they'd be just as happy to hire someone to write negative entries. They're attempting to correct what they see as negative spin.
Nice one. In reality it was to correct information in Wikipedia that is just plain wrong.Well, nothing that he wrote in his article is "just plain wrong". Even his very first statement - the standard *does* define those sections, it does *not* provide implementation details, and while they are "optional", it's nitpicking at best to claim that they aren't a weakness in the standard and the inability for third parties to implement them is a problem.
The article in its current state doesn't say anything about "implementing the entire 6000 pages or MS will sue" and I don't feel like digging through the history in an attempt to find where he might have seen it. It's worth noting that the MS covenant only applies to conforming implementations, and there may have more been made of that fact in older versions of the article.
His final "inaccuracy" isn't anything of the sort, it's an accurate statement that he feels is unfair. He actually spends more time talking about this one than about any of the previous "inaccuracies", which might give you some insight into how he might edit the article. His stated reason for believing it to be unfair is factually inaccurate, too, which again indicates exactly how well researched and unbiased his opinions are likely to be.
Even the most rebellious of my peers when I was that age knew better than to blame the owner of the pool hall when they let the 40 year old alcoholics who hung out there feel them up in exchange for cigarettes.
Not for entrapment, but maybe the relatives of the sex offender could sue under the law of attractive nuisance. I know, I know, it's a whole new game of blame the victim, but if you let your daughter meet random people from the internet for sex, you *are* contributing to a public hazard...
Hard drives use a standard interface. You don't need special drivers for your hard drive, only for drive controllers which are built into the XBox and thus not an issue. This is not a support issue, this is MS enjoying the closed, proprietary platform they always wanted the PC to be.
It's not new by any means. Businesses have been using RSA tokens for VPN access, and dial-up before that, for years. In (at least some parts of) Europe, online banking uses tokens. I think what's throwing you here is that they're calling them dongles and not tokens. A game using it is something new, though, and I respect Blizzard for looking at ways to try to mitigate the growing account hacking problem.
Please refer to my original post. You don't know what natural rights are if you think the letter of the law matters is at all relevant to this topic.
The ones you added to the OPs statement so that your unsupportable argument looked stronger? No, they're meaningless.
I don't think you know what natural rights are. Go read a fucking book.
. 2) Boolean logic is a system. It has certain, limited, capabilities which do not include anything like the concept of jumps. You can build other systems, that do include jumps, out of boolean logic but that still doesn't mean that if and while are boolean constructs. They aren't.
They don't ignore small business, they follow the direction of their customers and the community. Quicken works fine under CrossOver, for example. If people want QuickBooks, then more than 12 people should say something. And more than 4 people should pledge something, and more than zero people should post known issues or bugs.
I don't know what they do now, but a few years ago WildTangent was on the forefront of the "here's a cool 3d app, pay no attention to our spyware" business. So this guy may very well have issues beyond "it's too hard to write game installers" now.
As a hint for *your* code, due to JavaScript's stupid scoping limitations, it's best to minimize your global variables. Have a single global object with some relatively complicated name (or a global function you call to initialize an object) and expose your error and status information as part of that object.
Buffer overflows are found in C code every day, even in heavily audited C code. Written by extremely skilled programmers. It *is* a fault of the language, and it's stupid to argue otherwise - it's mindless fanboyism at best. It can only be worked around by an extreme (and, as shown by real world code, unachievable) level of discipline and expertise, coupled with fallible automatic tools.
People write in C for lots of reasons. Nobody who isn't a cretin writes in it because they think it's innately secure.
But the GPL specifies *no* additional restrictions, advertising clause is an additional restriction, end of story. That's all there is to it - 4 clause BSD license is not GPL compatible.
The PyDev extensions for Eclipse are distributed under a free license that includes the requirement that you take a deep breath and relax. That's a GPL-incompatible clause. Legal nitpicking is how you keep your house clean.
The FSF requires copyright assignment for all GNU projects (since the FSF are the owners and maintainers of the GNU project). Copyright assignment is relatively rare in the open source world, because it requires extensive and expensive legal infrastructure, not least of which is the organizational body that will actually hold the copy rights. It's also a pain for submitters, who need to send notarized copyright assignment documents. It's the best way to keep your house legally clean, but it requires a great deal of trust and willingness from your contributors. The Linux kernel as a notable OSS project does not require copyright assignments. Nominally OSS projects that are run (and sometimes dual-licensed) by a corporation often require copyright assignments, MySQL is an example.
Blizzard has roughly 6m accounts that pay $15 a month. That's all that matters, really - they aren't trying to count "real people" who play, and even if they did it'd be a meaningless number. What is important, from a business standpoint, is that wow has $90M coming in each month from subscribers.
I ordered a new Dell laptop for my wife recently and was pleasantly surprised to see that there's an option for media, and it doesn't even cost anything extra. Hopefully it's real media and not a stupid restore CD. We'll see when it gets here.
Does the hard drive come with a separate license explicitly entitling you to a refund if you choose not to accept the extensive post-sale license it subjects you to?
Whenever a tech writer feels like he needs a little more exposure he writes something about how programmers don't write good interfaces, and they're condescending to users. It's trivial, obvious fluff writing that people have been doing for at least 20 years. There's never anything new in the articles, and most of what *is* in them is wrong.
The equivalent Python: for num in "12,2a,3f".split(","): print int(num, 16) The least obvious bit is the need to tell int() (or to_i) to use base 16. A more exact Python version would be a list comprehension: [int(num, 16) for num in "12,2a,3f".split(",")] Which is slightly less readable to someone who doesn't know Python. I have only a very passing knowledge of Ruby but figured out what the snipped did without trouble.
It's worth pointing out that the lack of core strings and vectors means that every C++ library more than 5 years old has it's own implementation of them, which means hooking libraries together means you get to waste time, memory, and performance on shuffling between almost identical string and array implementations. Multiple implementations of things like strings and basic vectors is a weakness, not a strength. The ability to provide specialized implementations of these is a strength, and D has that.
Your sig is particularly appropriate, because I was interested in the good cause, but am at work and am not so sure about the ladies - clothing part.
Without a *prior* contract in place, anything anyone sends to you in the mail is yours, free and clear. This is due to an old mail fraud scam, where you'd send someone magazines, or books, or whatever, and then bill them for services rendered. Shrinkwrap licenses don't work (because courts and lawmakers actually gave a shit about that kind of deceptive marketing 100 years ago). So if Microsoft sent people a laptop, if they didn't have a contract *before they sent it*, then they just gave away laptops. That's why the Microsoft letter says "give away or return", and that's why it's just spin anyway. Corporations don't give stuff like this away "just for fun". You can bet that it's entered on a balance sheet as "goodwill" somewhere. But you aren't supposed to be so obvious or extravagant with your bribes, so they're taking heat and they're trying to spin out of it.