The literal definition actually refers to sitting on a roof to overhear conversation coming out a window ("eaves"-dropping). It does not refer to line of sight in any way.
Man, every now and then I read a post here and I think, fuck, what a shitty goddamn world this is getting to be. Did you get beat up by a mexican when you were a baby or something? Or maybe you're just another fucking white trash loser who feels like the dirty goddamn beaners are taking away something that you deserve. Go get a job picking tomatos in the central valley, if you think you've got it so bad.
It would not at all suprise me if this was mainly the decision of some pissed off scientists who feel that Antarctica is far too important for mere civilians to be casually flying over, THANK YOU very much GOOD DAY sir!.
Or that he's an annoying guy in real life and just happened to piss the people down there off.
You know that the UN does stuff besides overthrow rulers, right? Do you even know anything about it besides what you see on TV? (BTW, it's not TOTALLY unreasonable to ask the US to build a new building, since we don't pay our dues...)
HTAs get access to the local file system, as well as the ability to run compiled code that mere web pages don't have (even on the lowest security settings). They're basically normal Win32 applications that use HTML for the UI instead of normal widgets. It's not that different in concept from writing XUL applications using the Chrome engine (as opposed to viewing web pages using mozilla).
In fairness, Microsoft has never, and has never shown any indication that it will, used its patent portfolio to squish competition. This may be because they have far more reliable methods at thier disposal, but they certainly do have the patent resources to make life really, really difficult for Mozilla and Linux developers (to say nothing of Samba), all of which they detest with a passion.
I, personally, would consider a link to the original source to be sufficent, but heres what the GPL has to say:
c) Accompany it with the information you received as to the offer to distribute corresponding source code. (This alternative is allowed only for noncommercial distribution and only if you received the program in object code or executable form with such an offer, in accord with Subsection b above.)
So, a link the the mirror is only acceptable if you're re-distirbuting binaries without modification, and then only if you're doing it non-commercially.
People keep saying this and it just shows how much they fail to understand why this open source thing happens at all. Who's going to "push"? Who're you going to push? How're you going to do it?
People write code to scratch itches. The benefit of open source is that sometimes alot of other people have that same itch and something grows. Sometimes you realize after a bit that there's better solutions and you just stop working and the project dies. Sometimes nobody cares about your project and you work on it alone, because you feel like it. Who cares if they don't contribute to the "leader"? Maybe they don't like the way it's designed. Maybe the project heads aren't responsive to patches from unknown people, so it's a long process to get recognized and it's more fulfilling to just write your own (this a relatively common state of affairs). Maybe they don't even know who the leader is, or they think it's them. It's not like these resources are costing you anything.
When people suggest using open source software, they don't generally mean to go to sourceforge, do a search, and start using the first project to come up. There's no "confusing potential users" - if you're interested in a project, then you can be a user. If you're not, then you aren't. Period.
The whole reason OSS works is because peoples desire to work on something that they want to can grow into a real, viable project.
There's been a number of those, too - gcc/egcs being the most famous. There's one going on right now with XFree. I can't think of any that have ended up killing a successfull project, so I'm not sure what the good Doctor is talking about (I'd know more if there was a link to the frigging article....)
It may just be a buisnessmans issue, where you open source a project, the community decides that they don't like the way you're running it and forks it off and makes a competing product. Thats not really a problem to me, but I imagine it could keep a manager from considering opening a project.
I have to say, if I were a professional spammer I'd be using custom SMTP clients that didn't bother with stuff like "standards" and waiting on long timeouts and resending after a 450. All that matters is getting as much mail out as fast as possible, so just skipping hosts that aren't keeping up at a reasonable level would probably be the best option.
You'd need something the rough size & shape of a mouse, but that had a gymball-style shell on it that let you rotate it around. And a strap, so you could click while you rotated. The strap would be a pain.
I got Fallout 1 & 2 in a $5 dollar bundle (new) from a Best Buy or Circuit City or CompUSA or some similiar store. It was most depressing, because all the other games on the shelf in those bundles were things like Barbies Fabulous Bakeoff.
In some areas it's illegal to have "continuous sales" like this - I worked at retailer (Kohl's) where we'd rotate stuff off sale one week a month to conform to local laws - other Kohls in other states didn't have to do that.
It depends on just how much your story is like LOTR. How much is too much is very subjective and depends alot on your lawyer and how convincing he is. It's the same for software except theres even less case law giving you a clear standard to work from.
Basically, aside from clean rooming, there is no 100% way to ensure that you aren't violating copyright, in ANY field.
I get this argument alot in my pushes for open source at my job as well. After much arguing, I've discovered the source of it - it's not that anyone expects Microsoft to step up and provide support (certainly not unpaid support), it's all about someones decision making being on the line. If you can blame MS in a meeting, then you're safe. Basically, as long as you spend an assload of money, it's okay if it doesn't work, because then you can spend MORE money hiring consultants to fix it. If you have to justify going with a low-cost alternative that ends up not working out of box, then your job may be in jeapordy.
You know, it sounds to me like the grievance they need to be filing is that they're being asked to drive too long in a shift without time for a nap (although, unless this is long haul stuff we're talking about, I don't see why they'd need to sleep...), rather than about the tracking.
I'd agree with you if this wasn't a frigging PATENT case. Copyright, sure.
Re:Soon to be decided
on
SCOrched Earth
·
· Score: 2, Interesting
In fairness, SCO won't have too much trouble complying with this - all they have to do is show the results of thier pattern matching. The actual validity of the evidence doesn't matter just yet, and while they may be ripped apart in the (slashdot) press, IBM will have to wait till later in the trial to show why the evidence SCO produced isn't actually a copyright violation.
Slashdot Mirror
The literal definition actually refers to sitting on a roof to overhear conversation coming out a window ("eaves"-dropping). It does not refer to line of sight in any way.
Man, every now and then I read a post here and I think, fuck, what a shitty goddamn world this is getting to be. Did you get beat up by a mexican when you were a baby or something? Or maybe you're just another fucking white trash loser who feels like the dirty goddamn beaners are taking away something that you deserve. Go get a job picking tomatos in the central valley, if you think you've got it so bad.
Or that he's an annoying guy in real life and just happened to piss the people down there off.
You know that the UN does stuff besides overthrow rulers, right? Do you even know anything about it besides what you see on TV? (BTW, it's not TOTALLY unreasonable to ask the US to build a new building, since we don't pay our dues...)
HTAs get access to the local file system, as well as the ability to run compiled code that mere web pages don't have (even on the lowest security settings). They're basically normal Win32 applications that use HTML for the UI instead of normal widgets. It's not that different in concept from writing XUL applications using the Chrome engine (as opposed to viewing web pages using mozilla).
In fairness, Microsoft has never, and has never shown any indication that it will, used its patent portfolio to squish competition. This may be because they have far more reliable methods at thier disposal, but they certainly do have the patent resources to make life really, really difficult for Mozilla and Linux developers (to say nothing of Samba), all of which they detest with a passion.
Well, theres at least one guy who WOULD have had one, if the government hadn't come down on him.
Your comment wasn't relevent to the parent - it's reasonable to call him an ass whether or not they fork or not.
Yeah, ebay is lame and they broke the link. I'll try to fix it.
That doesn't make him not an ass.
So, a link the the mirror is only acceptable if you're re-distirbuting binaries without modification, and then only if you're doing it non-commercially.
The key generation algorithm for Windows XP has been reverse engineered. That amounts to a 'crack' as far as I'm concerned.
People write code to scratch itches. The benefit of open source is that sometimes alot of other people have that same itch and something grows. Sometimes you realize after a bit that there's better solutions and you just stop working and the project dies. Sometimes nobody cares about your project and you work on it alone, because you feel like it. Who cares if they don't contribute to the "leader"? Maybe they don't like the way it's designed. Maybe the project heads aren't responsive to patches from unknown people, so it's a long process to get recognized and it's more fulfilling to just write your own (this a relatively common state of affairs). Maybe they don't even know who the leader is, or they think it's them. It's not like these resources are costing you anything.
When people suggest using open source software, they don't generally mean to go to sourceforge, do a search, and start using the first project to come up. There's no "confusing potential users" - if you're interested in a project, then you can be a user. If you're not, then you aren't. Period.
The whole reason OSS works is because peoples desire to work on something that they want to can grow into a real, viable project.
So? If software thats central to the success of your company is something that you outsource, you need to start rethinking what you're doing.
It may just be a buisnessmans issue, where you open source a project, the community decides that they don't like the way you're running it and forks it off and makes a competing product. Thats not really a problem to me, but I imagine it could keep a manager from considering opening a project.
I have to say, if I were a professional spammer I'd be using custom SMTP clients that didn't bother with stuff like "standards" and waiting on long timeouts and resending after a 450. All that matters is getting as much mail out as fast as possible, so just skipping hosts that aren't keeping up at a reasonable level would probably be the best option.
You'd need something the rough size & shape of a mouse, but that had a gymball-style shell on it that let you rotate it around. And a strap, so you could click while you rotated. The strap would be a pain.
Or maybe you'll just give Acclaim a really good idea for it's next PR campaign.
I got Fallout 1 & 2 in a $5 dollar bundle (new) from a Best Buy or Circuit City or CompUSA or some similiar store. It was most depressing, because all the other games on the shelf in those bundles were things like Barbies Fabulous Bakeoff.
In some areas it's illegal to have "continuous sales" like this - I worked at retailer (Kohl's) where we'd rotate stuff off sale one week a month to conform to local laws - other Kohls in other states didn't have to do that.
Basically, aside from clean rooming, there is no 100% way to ensure that you aren't violating copyright, in ANY field.
Yes, the corporate mentatility is wierd.
You know, it sounds to me like the grievance they need to be filing is that they're being asked to drive too long in a shift without time for a nap (although, unless this is long haul stuff we're talking about, I don't see why they'd need to sleep...), rather than about the tracking.
I'd agree with you if this wasn't a frigging PATENT case. Copyright, sure.
In fairness, SCO won't have too much trouble complying with this - all they have to do is show the results of thier pattern matching. The actual validity of the evidence doesn't matter just yet, and while they may be ripped apart in the (slashdot) press, IBM will have to wait till later in the trial to show why the evidence SCO produced isn't actually a copyright violation.