The current GPL states you do not need to accept it to use it; indeed, it rejects the idea that there is any legal need to do so. How can the GPL3 go back on this?
Tracker ratios are spoofable. This is well-known to anyone who's read the protocol. The peers use directly measured rates to control their upload rates.
So, how exactly did this make a frontpage story, anyway?
DRM will only make things worse for eg OOo. Do you think MS will only use it on signed documents? And would you trust security by obscurity with a contract. On closer examination it seems it's digitally signed, but I still fear some people will just look at the image of the signature and not the actual digital signature details.
One of the screenshots is that of a signature pad (no, not the digital kind). I wonder, how secure do they intend to market this as? Since it's just an image it'd be trivial to lift it and drop it into another document, or to edit the document after the signature is applied.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but wouldn't it be impossible for the GPLv3 to prevent dual-licencing? All that's happening, after all, is the copyright holder granting additional rights above and beyond what the GPL gives, to selected parties, for a fee. No licence can work against the wishes of the copyright holder like that.
Or they may be testing things and rebooting the server periodically. It's not supposed to be up yet, if there's downtime you have no right to complain.
FWIW, I just got connected now. Kopete doesn't seem to like it, but gaim connected easily enough.
On the contrary - "not being evil" can draw customers (or ad viewers) to them. Whoever said the two goals "don't be evil" and "make money" are incompatible?
If google uses jabber, they can allow their users to use IM gateways on other servers. These gateways are already available, in fact - but if google calls too much attention to them I'm sure they'll all collapse under the weight:)
I'm not sure where you're getting this. We don't even know if they'll have any money made off this. Google Earth was a free (not RMS free, mind) version of a non-free product they acquired.
If this system is based on Jabber (and talk.google.com really is running a jabber server, I checked), you or your ISP or anyone else will be able to run their own Jabber server and link it in. The idea is similar to email - if you mail foobar@example.com from your account at barfoo@talk.google.com, talk.google.com connects to example.com for the duration of your conversation.
A whole lotta errors here. Try again, maybe with a pastebin instead? Assuming that slashcode broke it, and you're not just throwing together all of perlvar and hoping it works.
It does, actually. At least in unix-like systems, time is represented by the number of seconds since January 1, 1970 (known as the Unix Epoch). There are C library functions to convert it to a date, accounting for time zone, locale, formatting, etc.
People wanted OO, so a nasty hack was bolted on top to allow some semblance of it. Now this nasty hack is being expanded. Sure, the code's different, but the basic form is the same.
Admittedly, perl 5 OO is rather hackish, but Perl 6 OO truly is different. Instead of taking some random object and blessing it to a package, Perl 6 makes classes first-class objects, and allows instances to be created, just as in most other OO programming languages. Yes, even ruby.
Umm... this is exactly like orbital zero gravity. The only difference is the orbit always misses the planet, whereas if the airplane left its engines off the period of weightlessness would be substantially limited. In fact, there is no place in the universe with true zero gravity - even if you could find a point where all gravitational forces are balanced, only one particle could be there at a time.
As for a black hole, no, it won't be negated, as the gravitational field will differ so much between two nearby points a measurable net pulling force would be detected. With the Earth's comparatively miniscule field this phenomenon is too small to be measured.
I imagine with better OS support the restore process could be lazy - swap out all that is swappable, empty the disk cache, save the rest for resume. Then you just have to reload the unswappable data.
Your right, in most cases, nothing would have changed, but if for instance a DRAM module was removed which contained some part of a process, the system would crash on restore. (because as the process is already linked, it cant easilly be moved in memory)
On the contrary, user applications are linked into a virtual address space, which may not directly correspond with physical memory (and almost always does not). This mapping can even change during normal operation, due to swapping, and pages may be shared between processes. Kernel memory (which in Linux at least is linearly mapped to physical ram) would be more of a worry.
Most days I boot my computer, there's a marked absence of strange new hardware...
True, but your computer can't be sure unless it checks, and if it doesn't check, a malicious program could crash it by asking it to access some hw which doesn't exist.
In any case, things like PCI allocation have to be done each boot, and it's easy enough to assign drivers at that stage.
Who cares how big the source is? Turn off all the hardware and features you don't need when compiling it. Or just stick with prebuilt, one-size-fits-all kernels which run on anything from toasters to mainframes, and don't complain it has to be big to do that.
My understanding of what this scheme means is that, in the end, you end up developing code for free for an enterprise that will license that code under a proprietary license. Exactly how these companies will disentangle GPL code contributions made by others and sell you a proprietary license is something I don't quite understand. Maybe there's a legal, untested, loophole.
They only accept contributions with the copyright assigned to them. That way they can licence it under whatever terms they want. If you don't want your code sold, keep the copyright to yourself - but it'll never be in the standard distribution.
I don't know about you, but when I clean spyware I don't list off the exact things found usually. The user doesn't care, they just want their system fixed.
Slashdot Mirror
The current GPL states you do not need to accept it to use it; indeed, it rejects the idea that there is any legal need to do so. How can the GPL3 go back on this?
Tracker ratios are spoofable. This is well-known to anyone who's read the protocol. The peers use directly measured rates to control their upload rates.
So, how exactly did this make a frontpage story, anyway?
While this is true for RSA, it does not hold for all split key encryption systems - eg, DSA or ElGamal.
DRM will only make things worse for eg OOo. Do you think MS will only use it on signed documents? And would you trust security by obscurity with a contract. On closer examination it seems it's digitally signed, but I still fear some people will just look at the image of the signature and not the actual digital signature details.
One of the screenshots is that of a signature pad (no, not the digital kind). I wonder, how secure do they intend to market this as? Since it's just an image it'd be trivial to lift it and drop it into another document, or to edit the document after the signature is applied.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but wouldn't it be impossible for the GPLv3 to prevent dual-licencing? All that's happening, after all, is the copyright holder granting additional rights above and beyond what the GPL gives, to selected parties, for a fee. No licence can work against the wishes of the copyright holder like that.
Or they may be testing things and rebooting the server periodically. It's not supposed to be up yet, if there's downtime you have no right to complain. FWIW, I just got connected now. Kopete doesn't seem to like it, but gaim connected easily enough.
On the contrary - "not being evil" can draw customers (or ad viewers) to them. Whoever said the two goals "don't be evil" and "make money" are incompatible?
If google uses jabber, they can allow their users to use IM gateways on other servers. These gateways are already available, in fact - but if google calls too much attention to them I'm sure they'll all collapse under the weight :)
I'm not sure where you're getting this. We don't even know if they'll have any money made off this. Google Earth was a free (not RMS free, mind) version of a non-free product they acquired.
If this system is based on Jabber (and talk.google.com really is running a jabber server, I checked), you or your ISP or anyone else will be able to run their own Jabber server and link it in. The idea is similar to email - if you mail foobar@example.com from your account at barfoo@talk.google.com, talk.google.com connects to example.com for the duration of your conversation.
A whole lotta errors here. Try again, maybe with a pastebin instead? Assuming that slashcode broke it, and you're not just throwing together all of perlvar and hoping it works.
http://tor.eff.org
http://www.i2p.net
Set up a server in tor or i2p, log nothing.
It does, actually. At least in unix-like systems, time is represented by the number of seconds since January 1, 1970 (known as the Unix Epoch). There are C library functions to convert it to a date, accounting for time zone, locale, formatting, etc.
Admittedly, perl 5 OO is rather hackish, but Perl 6 OO truly is different. Instead of taking some random object and blessing it to a package, Perl 6 makes classes first-class objects, and allows instances to be created, just as in most other OO programming languages. Yes, even ruby.
If enough people use it to refer to something else, it stops being a trademark.
FYI, 'shattered.world' is not an actual domain name.
Umm... this is exactly like orbital zero gravity. The only difference is the orbit always misses the planet, whereas if the airplane left its engines off the period of weightlessness would be substantially limited. In fact, there is no place in the universe with true zero gravity - even if you could find a point where all gravitational forces are balanced, only one particle could be there at a time.
As for a black hole, no, it won't be negated, as the gravitational field will differ so much between two nearby points a measurable net pulling force would be detected. With the Earth's comparatively miniscule field this phenomenon is too small to be measured.
aptitude install kernel-image-2.6-386 # if you know a closer match for your CPU feel free to use it here
aptitude install k3b
Reboot, and use k3b.
If you prefer a command-line approach, you can just install mkisofs and cdrecord instead of k3b.
I imagine with better OS support the restore process could be lazy - swap out all that is swappable, empty the disk cache, save the rest for resume. Then you just have to reload the unswappable data.
Who cares how big the source is? Turn off all the hardware and features you don't need when compiling it. Or just stick with prebuilt, one-size-fits-all kernels which run on anything from toasters to mainframes, and don't complain it has to be big to do that.
They only accept contributions with the copyright assigned to them. That way they can licence it under whatever terms they want. If you don't want your code sold, keep the copyright to yourself - but it'll never be in the standard distribution.
I don't know about you, but when I clean spyware I don't list off the exact things found usually. The user doesn't care, they just want their system fixed.