You know, Aaron Swartz was not fighting against a judicial process. He was trying to get scientific publication free of charge for everyone in order to boost scientific progress.
THIS is what we could do to honor him. All the proposals I see can be summed up by "he would have been condemned but by fair trial, not by an abusive procedure." None attack the core issue : that it is considered illegal to share freely scientific publications.
It means that to safely pirate ebooks, you will need to rephrase and repunctuate it to remove the watermarks. How much do you need to modify a text to make it a derived work? I wonder if this can be done without authors' approval, especially if they add mistakes (yes, punctuation can be erroneous)
HFT relies on the assumption that the real value of a stock changes several times per second (even down to the scale of the nano second). Everyone can see that the only event that can happen at such a high frquency is other high-frequency mechanism taking decisions. This is clearly a zero-sum game that runs on speculation.
There is a strong case for imposing a lower trading frquency. I would have said a one-hour timestep but some people go as far as proposing a one-day step. After all, stock exchanges close at night and during weekends.
Steve Jobs death also proved HFT to be ridiculous : Do you remember what happened to Apple's stock during this event? It was suspended for a day. Because everyone knew this was a signficiant event that would change the stock value but that with HFT people would be trying to anticipate short-term reaction (SELL! SELL!) rather than actual stock values. This is an admission that HFT actually hurts the ability of stock exchanges at discerning the true prices of stocks.
In this day and age anyone not pathologically idiot can set up a blog and publish his opinion to the world. Moderating a forum or a mailing list does not prevent the publication of a given opinion.
Just look at the Streisand effect and see how even the US government did not manage to shut down wikileaks. Censorship is almost impossible nowadays for opinions that some people want to hear.
Moderating a forum is what we call an editorializing process. When I come to, for instance, KWin support forums, I expect to see discussions about KWin bugs and workarounds, not opinion for or against Obama. This is not to see that I refuse that people who want to talk about Obama can do it, but not in this place. There are numerous other venues on the web to do so.
"According to these evidences, that I can not, by law, show to anyone, but that get flagged by the new GoogleThinkOfTheChildren algorithm, your picture named ProofOfPoliceAbuse.jpg is actually child porn and needs to be censored."
Now that people accept the idea that the NSA can read anything in Google, how long will it take them to accept the idea that it also has a write access?
People used to believe that free market could come up with a thing called "insurance" for that kind of cases. But free market supposes also that all actors are law-abiding.
Up to a certain point. Actually data center care about performance per watt because it actually means performance per dollar. However, a small saving in watts does not necessarily justifies a tripling of the price for instance.
Also, some applications benefit hugely from being able to run on a single core or even a single CPU. Saves a lot of complexity and internal bandwidth.
Running a datacenter efficiently does not depend on a single factor.
Well, in the 2000's (I think 2007 ?) I was working at Total Immersion, an augmented reality company, and DEMO was fairly impressed/interested with this non-internet company.
Yeah... If only there was a way to see the full text of his declaration. I don't know, we could try to use one of these things youngsters use, how is it again?... Ah yes! hyperlinks. I think they call this situation a RTFA YOLO LOL
Yes, it's that time again - another week or so has passed, and a new
release candidate is made in order to encourage and remind people to
try things out.
I wish I could say that things are calming down, but I'd be lying. rc5
is noticeably bigger than rc4, both in number of commits and in files
changed (although rc4 actually had more lines changed, so there's
that).
Guys, guys, guys. I'm going to have to start cursing again unless you
stop sending me non-critical stuff. So the next pull request I get
that has "cleanups" or just pointless churn, I'm going to call you
guys out on, and try to come up with new ways to insult you, your
mother, and your deceased pet hamster.
So don't do it. Send me just fixes to serious problems. Ok?
Anyway, the rc5 changes are pretty much all over: pretty much exactly
half are drivers (networking, usb, gpu, mmc, sound..), with the other
half being various other subsystems. Some arch updates: MIPS, arm,
smattering of ia64, microblaze, s390 and some x86. And networking
(non-driver), xfs, fuse, gfs2, jfs..
So there's more than I'd like, but at least none of it looks particularly scary.
Go out and test. And again - please don't make me curse you and your pets.
Linus
Shocking heh? Linus did just what you suggest he should do. Giving clear instructions and humorous threats. I guess that's his mistake : he has been living in America for long enough to know to not trust Americans' sense of humor.
This begs the question, can you call an API free if you have to pay for it to return accurate information? What is the point of such an API? Should the community not expect that core Java classes are fully functional and accurate?
The point of a free API is the ability to create independent implementation, exactly because this kind of scenario can and will happen everytime you depend on a library.
There are open source implementations of the java runtime. They don't have all the latest features, but the reference implementation is complete. This may be worth investigating. If it costs less to make your software running on an OSS runtime than to buy an oracle license, go for it...
What he did with Manning was what every journalist of the world does : trying to get sources to give exclusive information. Had Assange worked for the NYT there would be no question about how legit it was.
About being a coward to not go into tribunal and face those charges, well, the US does not provide tribunals anymore for this. Look at what is happening to Manning. Understand as well that as a non-US citizen, Assange can end up in of the many "anti-terrorist" loopholes that US administrations have created over the years.
Last I checked Sweden doesn't kill people, not even for suspected sexual assault.
Last I checked, US didn't mind keeping people in jail for more than 10 years outside of any judicial process. Last I checked, Sweden didn't mind handling people the US asked for "terrorist invesitgation". A US senator has called for the death penalty for Assange. Bradley Manning has been detended in conditions that would make everyone raise eyebrows if it was happening in a poorer country. Is it really tinfoil hat wearing to believe that Assange can end up in Guantanamo fairly quickly if he gets out of the embassy?
Ah yes. Because there is only law in this world. No one, ever, breaks the law from a governmental position. Especially not international law, which does not really exist and that is enforced by no one.
The sad truth is that Sweden already made extra-judicial rendition of "terrorists" to USA, outside of any legal framework.
The cablegate showed many instances where US have shown contempt to international right. (Assassination lists in Afghanistan? Really?) There are exceptions to extraditions : you must prevent extraditions when you think the person won't receive a fair trial. In Assange's case, the suspicion is very high that he won't get one and that there are US pressure in this case.
He is also trapped in an embassy, and making occasional news outlet is the only thing that keeps him alive and this is not an hyperbole. He did wikileaks, and is now trying to fight for his right to remain free even after that. That is indeed a commendable effort.
UMP is not "centre-right". Their model is US Republicans, on the French political spectrum, they are clearly right wing, and trying to attract far-right voters. Even by US standard, they would be clearly Republicans.
This is not a French official election, this is an internal party vote, organized by the political party itself. There are no rules or law to regulate how they vote. The UMP has made itself ridicule already with their leaders' election, but the socialist party was not particularly better when they did the same (fraud in both camps, but they agreed to settle it down)
No one really expects UMP anymore to make a non-fraudulent election. The chief of UMP recently said " We are learning democracy at UMP, it is a bit new." Said this seriously. They were just in power for 10 years...
But when will I be able to buy a laptop with more than 768 lines for under 1000â? When will I get a monitor with more than 1080 lines for under than 300â?
4 years ago, I bought a 1980x1200 for 150â. Prices have gone up since then. What is happening?
Actually, gasoline engines scale down pretty well nowadays. You lose a bit of efficiency, but if you want to have range, they are still your best bet. A small gasoline RC plane could cross the Atlantic for instance. You can't yet do that with an electrical one (unless you use solar panels of course).
The reasons on why you don't see them in quadcopters are twofolds : First, they indeed are heavier and more complicated. Putting 4 of these in place is harder to do and you need to feed them gasoline, to have 4 valves, this is more complicated. However, on regular RC-helicopters, gasoline engines are very common : a single engine can activate both propellers and there is no need for them to turn at different speeds.
Which brings me to the second point : Quadcopters engines need to change speed very quickly, they also need to stop and start again almost instantly, which a gasoline engine cannot do. You almost need to kickstart it with an electrical engine.
I think quadcopter are much more precise than regular helicopters, but in disaster relief, you don't need precision, you need range.
Bitcoin and anonymity seems to be the most misunderstood thing in this whole mess. Bitcoin is not by itself anonymous. It doesn't hide IPs, all the transactions are public, all the accounts balances are public. Bitcoin can be anonymous if you never link your identity to a bank account. That is, if you manage to hide your identity while buying bitcoins and while buying stuff with it.
Bitcoin was touted as an anonymous currency because it can be used as such in the dreams of cryptoanarchists who imagine a society of anonymous (or rather, pseudonymous) persons collaboratively earning money and spending it through dematerialized goods. Bitcoin has been made with this very narrow economical niche in mind. Anonymity in bitcoin is good just as long as you don't link a physical identity and address to an account. And then, your whole network of transactions can be discovered (unless you have been really very careful). If you want anonymity for buying physical goods, use cash.
They renamed it low-energy nuclear reaction. A few real physicists and a lot of crackpots are still doing works under that not-yet-too-well-known denomination. IIRC, after the cold fusion debacle, the US Navy made a report on the whole situation, saying it was a small probability of success, high benefits if successful situation, and recommended to fund it moderatly and continue research in a few labs.
Slashdot Mirror
You know, Aaron Swartz was not fighting against a judicial process. He was trying to get scientific publication free of charge for everyone in order to boost scientific progress.
THIS is what we could do to honor him. All the proposals I see can be summed up by "he would have been condemned but by fair trial, not by an abusive procedure." None attack the core issue : that it is considered illegal to share freely scientific publications.
Why do you need a new language?
It means that to safely pirate ebooks, you will need to rephrase and repunctuate it to remove the watermarks. How much do you need to modify a text to make it a derived work? I wonder if this can be done without authors' approval, especially if they add mistakes (yes, punctuation can be erroneous)
HFT relies on the assumption that the real value of a stock changes several times per second (even down to the scale of the nano second). Everyone can see that the only event that can happen at such a high frquency is other high-frequency mechanism taking decisions. This is clearly a zero-sum game that runs on speculation.
There is a strong case for imposing a lower trading frquency. I would have said a one-hour timestep but some people go as far as proposing a one-day step. After all, stock exchanges close at night and during weekends.
Steve Jobs death also proved HFT to be ridiculous : Do you remember what happened to Apple's stock during this event? It was suspended for a day. Because everyone knew this was a signficiant event that would change the stock value but that with HFT people would be trying to anticipate short-term reaction (SELL! SELL!) rather than actual stock values. This is an admission that HFT actually hurts the ability of stock exchanges at discerning the true prices of stocks.
Military folks dying during an official mission is easier to justify than killing off regular PhDs. Workplace safety is more lax with militaries.
In this day and age anyone not pathologically idiot can set up a blog and publish his opinion to the world. Moderating a forum or a mailing list does not prevent the publication of a given opinion.
Just look at the Streisand effect and see how even the US government did not manage to shut down wikileaks. Censorship is almost impossible nowadays for opinions that some people want to hear.
Moderating a forum is what we call an editorializing process. When I come to, for instance, KWin support forums, I expect to see discussions about KWin bugs and workarounds, not opinion for or against Obama. This is not to see that I refuse that people who want to talk about Obama can do it, but not in this place. There are numerous other venues on the web to do so.
"According to these evidences, that I can not, by law, show to anyone, but that get flagged by the new GoogleThinkOfTheChildren algorithm, your picture named ProofOfPoliceAbuse.jpg is actually child porn and needs to be censored."
Now that people accept the idea that the NSA can read anything in Google, how long will it take them to accept the idea that it also has a write access?
People used to believe that free market could come up with a thing called "insurance" for that kind of cases. But free market supposes also that all actors are law-abiding.
It has private contractors to do that...
This was posted on reddit a few days ago (pdf warning yadi yada). I think that the "From Legacy Code to Clean Code" section may be relevant to you.
Up to a certain point. Actually data center care about performance per watt because it actually means performance per dollar. However, a small saving in watts does not necessarily justifies a tripling of the price for instance.
Also, some applications benefit hugely from being able to run on a single core or even a single CPU. Saves a lot of complexity and internal bandwidth.
Running a datacenter efficiently does not depend on a single factor.
Well, in the 2000's (I think 2007 ?) I was working at Total Immersion, an augmented reality company, and DEMO was fairly impressed/interested with this non-internet company.
Yes, it's that time again - another week or so has passed, and a new release candidate is made in order to encourage and remind people to try things out.
I wish I could say that things are calming down, but I'd be lying. rc5 is noticeably bigger than rc4, both in number of commits and in files changed (although rc4 actually had more lines changed, so there's that).
Guys, guys, guys. I'm going to have to start cursing again unless you stop sending me non-critical stuff. So the next pull request I get that has "cleanups" or just pointless churn, I'm going to call you guys out on, and try to come up with new ways to insult you, your mother, and your deceased pet hamster.
So don't do it. Send me just fixes to serious problems. Ok?
Anyway, the rc5 changes are pretty much all over: pretty much exactly half are drivers (networking, usb, gpu, mmc, sound..), with the other half being various other subsystems. Some arch updates: MIPS, arm, smattering of ia64, microblaze, s390 and some x86. And networking (non-driver), xfs, fuse, gfs2, jfs..
So there's more than I'd like, but at least none of it looks particularly scary.
Go out and test. And again - please don't make me curse you and your pets.
Linus
Shocking heh? Linus did just what you suggest he should do. Giving clear instructions and humorous threats. I guess that's his mistake : he has been living in America for long enough to know to not trust Americans' sense of humor.
This begs the question, can you call an API free if you have to pay for it to return accurate information? What is the point of such an API? Should the community not expect that core Java classes are fully functional and accurate?
The point of a free API is the ability to create independent implementation, exactly because this kind of scenario can and will happen everytime you depend on a library. There are open source implementations of the java runtime. They don't have all the latest features, but the reference implementation is complete. This may be worth investigating. If it costs less to make your software running on an OSS runtime than to buy an oracle license, go for it...
What he did with Manning was what every journalist of the world does : trying to get sources to give exclusive information. Had Assange worked for the NYT there would be no question about how legit it was.
About being a coward to not go into tribunal and face those charges, well, the US does not provide tribunals anymore for this. Look at what is happening to Manning. Understand as well that as a non-US citizen, Assange can end up in of the many "anti-terrorist" loopholes that US administrations have created over the years.
Last I checked Sweden doesn't kill people, not even for suspected sexual assault.
Last I checked, US didn't mind keeping people in jail for more than 10 years outside of any judicial process. Last I checked, Sweden didn't mind handling people the US asked for "terrorist invesitgation". A US senator has called for the death penalty for Assange. Bradley Manning has been detended in conditions that would make everyone raise eyebrows if it was happening in a poorer country. Is it really tinfoil hat wearing to believe that Assange can end up in Guantanamo fairly quickly if he gets out of the embassy?
Ah yes. Because there is only law in this world. No one, ever, breaks the law from a governmental position. Especially not international law, which does not really exist and that is enforced by no one.
The sad truth is that Sweden already made extra-judicial rendition of "terrorists" to USA, outside of any legal framework.
The cablegate showed many instances where US have shown contempt to international right. (Assassination lists in Afghanistan? Really?) There are exceptions to extraditions : you must prevent extraditions when you think the person won't receive a fair trial. In Assange's case, the suspicion is very high that he won't get one and that there are US pressure in this case.
He is also trapped in an embassy, and making occasional news outlet is the only thing that keeps him alive and this is not an hyperbole. He did wikileaks, and is now trying to fight for his right to remain free even after that. That is indeed a commendable effort.
UMP is not "centre-right". Their model is US Republicans, on the French political spectrum, they are clearly right wing, and trying to attract far-right voters. Even by US standard, they would be clearly Republicans.
This is not a French official election, this is an internal party vote, organized by the political party itself. There are no rules or law to regulate how they vote. The UMP has made itself ridicule already with their leaders' election, but the socialist party was not particularly better when they did the same (fraud in both camps, but they agreed to settle it down)
No one really expects UMP anymore to make a non-fraudulent election. The chief of UMP recently said " We are learning democracy at UMP, it is a bit new." Said this seriously. They were just in power for 10 years...
But when will I be able to buy a laptop with more than 768 lines for under 1000â? When will I get a monitor with more than 1080 lines for under than 300â?
4 years ago, I bought a 1980x1200 for 150â. Prices have gone up since then. What is happening?
You say it like it is not an intended feature...
Actually, gasoline engines scale down pretty well nowadays. You lose a bit of efficiency, but if you want to have range, they are still your best bet. A small gasoline RC plane could cross the Atlantic for instance. You can't yet do that with an electrical one (unless you use solar panels of course).
The reasons on why you don't see them in quadcopters are twofolds : First, they indeed are heavier and more complicated. Putting 4 of these in place is harder to do and you need to feed them gasoline, to have 4 valves, this is more complicated. However, on regular RC-helicopters, gasoline engines are very common : a single engine can activate both propellers and there is no need for them to turn at different speeds.
Which brings me to the second point : Quadcopters engines need to change speed very quickly, they also need to stop and start again almost instantly, which a gasoline engine cannot do. You almost need to kickstart it with an electrical engine.
I think quadcopter are much more precise than regular helicopters, but in disaster relief, you don't need precision, you need range.
Bitcoin and anonymity seems to be the most misunderstood thing in this whole mess.
Bitcoin is not by itself anonymous. It doesn't hide IPs, all the transactions are public, all the accounts balances are public. Bitcoin can be anonymous if you never link your identity to a bank account. That is, if you manage to hide your identity while buying bitcoins and while buying stuff with it.
Bitcoin was touted as an anonymous currency because it can be used as such in the dreams of cryptoanarchists who imagine a society of anonymous (or rather, pseudonymous) persons collaboratively earning money and spending it through dematerialized goods. Bitcoin has been made with this very narrow economical niche in mind. Anonymity in bitcoin is good just as long as you don't link a physical identity and address to an account. And then, your whole network of transactions can be discovered (unless you have been really very careful). If you want anonymity for buying physical goods, use cash.
They renamed it low-energy nuclear reaction. A few real physicists and a lot of crackpots are still doing works under that not-yet-too-well-known denomination. IIRC, after the cold fusion debacle, the US Navy made a report on the whole situation, saying it was a small probability of success, high benefits if successful situation, and recommended to fund it moderatly and continue research in a few labs.
It is, but in US it is legal.