This doesn't identify someone downloading a file via bittorrent, it identifies someone downloading a *.bittorrent file (presumably via http).
This is a non-issue. If anyone actually starts using this, trackers will just start using shttp for their torrent files. They're small and (relatively) low traffic, so it would be a negligible performance issue.
The only notable thing about this article is that it points out how clueless tech journalists really are.
Not skin colour, fiddly bits or where they like to put them, or their imaginary friends.
I don't need to tolerate a cock in my ass to tolerate gay people, nor do I need to tolerate honour killings in order to tolerate fundamentalist Muslims.
It *may* be illegal to distribute music online (other copyrighted works are a different story), but it hasn't been tested and it's all but impossible to bring a case to court.
Further, it's perfectly for me to allow people to make copies of my iTunes library. I'm pretty sure you're wrong about the media requirement, but that's not the original owners responsibility in any case.
Once someone else has a copy of my iTunes library, what they do with it is not my responsibility.
Copyright reform in Canada isn't going to happen. It's politically radioactive.
If you write, say, an IRC client and release it under the GPL then I can't extend it in a proprietary way. It's a bit restrictive, but it can be overcome. I can write my own IRC client and do my own thing off somewhere else.
If you license a *platform* under the GPL I can't just go off and write my own. The value is as much in the people using it as the code itself.
KDE is a very nice desktop environment, but that's academic. QT's restrictive licensing essentially blocks all non-GPL activity on KDE.
QT is a very nice library, but it doesn't have anything over it's competitors to justify $4,000 per developer per year (or whatever it is now; Trolltech is too ashamed of itself to publicly list its fees). Until that changes, Gnome will necessarily be the de facto open source desktop.
The last time I saw one was in the late 90's. There might have been some sort of revenue sharing with the labels, but I'd imagine it was just your standard diamond-encrusted wires sold to credulous audiophiles.
The ones picked within the US can be charged in a civilian court, deported, or both. That's it.
Those picked up on the battlefield have done absolutely nothing wrong. If you invade a country, the civilians there have every right to attack your soldiers. That's war, sweetheart.
If you don't like it, don't wage it. Imprisoning people for defending their homes is not on.
The primary purpose of peer to peer systems are to either avoid censorship or provide lots of cheap/free bandwidth.
Neither of these really apply to source code management. Hosting is easily sponsored and the files aren't very big anyway. Few projects will face censorship anywhere other than the most regressive regimes (ie, China or the US).
Slashdot Mirror
This doesn't identify someone downloading a file via bittorrent, it identifies someone downloading a *.bittorrent file (presumably via http).
This is a non-issue. If anyone actually starts using this, trackers will just start using shttp for their torrent files. They're small and (relatively) low traffic, so it would be a negligible performance issue.
The only notable thing about this article is that it points out how clueless tech journalists really are.
So you could just have a small partition holding the ext2 driver. Not really worth the effort for that, but it makes sense for things like truecrypt.
Everyone is getting it for the fun of it. No one needs to watch TV.
Not skin colour, fiddly bits or where they like to put them, or their imaginary friends.
I don't need to tolerate a cock in my ass to tolerate gay people, nor do I need to tolerate honour killings in order to tolerate fundamentalist Muslims.
It *may* be illegal to distribute music online (other copyrighted works are a different story), but it hasn't been tested and it's all but impossible to bring a case to court.
Further, it's perfectly for me to allow people to make copies of my iTunes library. I'm pretty sure you're wrong about the media requirement, but that's not the original owners responsibility in any case.
Once someone else has a copy of my iTunes library, what they do with it is not my responsibility.
Copyright reform in Canada isn't going to happen. It's politically radioactive.
It may or may not be illegal, but it's practically impossible to do anything about it even if it is.
Regardless, it'd be perfectly legal for me to let you have a copy of my iTunes library, and what you do with it then is out of my control.
In many places, it's perfectly legal to share you music collection. Here in Canada we pay a tax on recordable media for that right.
It just herds people toward Gnome. I'm sure the FSF likes that just fine.
If you write, say, an IRC client and release it under the GPL then I can't extend it in a proprietary way. It's a bit restrictive, but it can be overcome. I can write my own IRC client and do my own thing off somewhere else.
If you license a *platform* under the GPL I can't just go off and write my own. The value is as much in the people using it as the code itself.
KDE is, in effect, a walled garden.
KDE isn't a factor.
What you can do with KDE is a subset of what you can do with Gnome, so there's no reason to support KDE if you support Gnome.
KDE is a very nice desktop environment, but that's academic. QT's restrictive licensing essentially blocks all non-GPL activity on KDE.
QT is a very nice library, but it doesn't have anything over it's competitors to justify $4,000 per developer per year (or whatever it is now; Trolltech is too ashamed of itself to publicly list its fees). Until that changes, Gnome will necessarily be the de facto open source desktop.
You obviously have to have a local copy of your data at some point. Why are you deleting it?
The last time I saw one was in the late 90's. There might have been some sort of revenue sharing with the labels, but I'd imagine it was just your standard diamond-encrusted wires sold to credulous audiophiles.
There were CDR drives packaged as stereo components that would only use "music" CDRs. Not sure if they're still made, I don't imagine they sold well.
You're seriously complaining about foreigners jumping in on your war in a foreign country?
They're not criminals (or "terrorists") unless you convict them of something. What part of "presumption of innocence" do you not understand?
They're all civilians.
The ones picked within the US can be charged in a civilian court, deported, or both. That's it.
Those picked up on the battlefield have done absolutely nothing wrong. If you invade a country, the civilians there have every right to attack your soldiers. That's war, sweetheart.
If you don't like it, don't wage it. Imprisoning people for defending their homes is not on.
No, you don't get to extract information from prisoners, or anyone else.
Yes, you do have to give "terrorists" a nice cell and good food, as well as a speedy trial by a jury of their peers.
Anything less justifies retribution, whether you call it "terrorism" or not.
I'm genuinely curious.
It seems to me that there'd be better revision management tools for video.
You keep source code in an SCM to manage diffs. Binary blobs don't diff very well.
Sure, it makes sense to keep binary blobs intended for specific revisions in an SCM, but other than that?
I don't see why you'd keep a film project in a SCM, and game art assets can be kept separate from the code anyway. SCMs won't track them very well.
Proof or it didn't happen.
Why don't you want your pet project hosted by a large corporation? You really just sound like you're whining about nothing.
I'm pretty sure neither Google Code nor Sourceforge discriminate against the third world.
The primary purpose of peer to peer systems are to either avoid censorship or provide lots of cheap/free bandwidth.
Neither of these really apply to source code management. Hosting is easily sponsored and the files aren't very big anyway. Few projects will face censorship anywhere other than the most regressive regimes (ie, China or the US).
Read the book, it bears no resemblance to the movie.
If you don't like it, vote against it.