Yeah, I guess the entire FSF project, and all the GNU utilities (including gcc) are taboo. You don't think they were using Linux or HURD when they wrote them back in the 80s do you? If it's taboo to develop for a proprietary system, then you have no GNU/Linux OS to work on. I guess everybody has to develop for FreeBSD now.
Why is it that computers and the internet are the only things ever deemed 'inappropriate for children.' If reading alt.atheism is deemed inappropriate for kids to read in a library, why are they still allowed to read ink-on-paper books about atheism? If sites with information about sex are deemed inappropriate to read on a computer, why can kids still check out books on sex and sexuality?
Either that or the people writing the book(s) realized that stoning people was no longer as popular as when the Old Testament was written, so for this religion to catch on, they needed a warmer, fluffier, kinder, gentler version of the Bible (sort of the religious equivalent of "Compassionate Conservatism").
well, taking some of the standards you mentioned, the Bible would indeed be considered offensive.
violence - advocates stoning people to death, innocent first-born sons of non-christians are killed (the houses where blood is put on the doors to indicate a christian lives there are spared), destruction of several entire cities, and lots more
lewd - description of sexual activity, references to homosexuality may offend some, and a particularly odd commandment that nobody who has lost a certain "privy member" may enter the kingdom of heaven (Deuteronomy 23:1).
bigotry - lots of anti-other-religion bigotry, but that's to be expected. There's also several odd things in Deuteronomy 23 in addition to the one outlined above, which include not allowing midgets or people with certain handicaps into heaven.
I'm sure there's lots more. I believe infidels.org has a more complete listing, and there was some fairly offensive stuff in there. Certainly stuff most Christians would object to if it was in any other book their kids were being allowed to read.
Well, yeah it'd be 4 total colors, but only 2 greys. In binary: 00 - white 01 - grey #1 10 - grey #2 11 - black
at least i assume that's how it would be done.
Open Source means free software
on
RMS on APSL
·
· Score: 1
Well, it seems that the intent of the Open Source Definition was to be a set of rules defining Free Software. However, it appears that either something is unclear, or people are misinterpreting it.
Richard Stallman says that the APSL is not compliant with the FSF's definition of Free Software.
Eric Raymond says that the APSL is indeed compliant with the Open Source Definition.
Since the Debian president signed onto your letter, it appears that at least part of Debian doesn't consider the APSL to be compliant with the Debian Free Software guidelines.
If it is not Free Software, and is not compliant with the DFSG, how can it be Open Source(tm)? I was under the impression that the Open Source Definition was virtually identical to the DFSG.
They have TONS of differences. Just because FreeBSD can do something, does not mean that Linux can do it (and vice versa). FreeBSD generally seems to be better at being a server. (witness cdrom.com's record-setting FreeBSD server).
No, that's neither a kernel nor a database problem. That's a filesystem problem, showing the limitations of the ext2fs filesystem. A database shouldn't have to implement its own filesystem just because the current one is extremely limited. On BeOS they don't have to either =)
I'm using win95 OSR2. What OS are you using? Supposedly it will be identical for all OSs when it's released, but I suppose the various ports may be at slightly different points of the development cycle right now...
No, any real person needs one to figure out the obfuscated mess of GUI programming. Linux needs one even more, unless you like spending your life and your sanity trying to learn GUI programming with 34 different toolkits because each of the projects you're supposed to be supporting uses a different toolkit.
I'd rather use a Visual development took for the GUI layout (win32, gtk, qt, whatever), and spend my time coding the actual program.
and you can't even get the alpha unless you're somebody deemed important enough to be given a login/password to the download area for it. the rest of us have to settle for the demo i guess.
Well, I paid $1300 for an Apple//c, 128kb RAM, 12" full-color monitor, in 1984. At the time that was pretty much top-of-the-line. Nowadays all you can get for $1300 is last year's technology.
I wasn't aware that the KDE license had been changed to the LGPL. When did this happen? Was permission for the license change received from all the copyright holders of the third-party GPL code the KDE team has used?
I'm not the one violating licenses, so I have no obligation to fix anything. They need to fix their own licensing mess, since they're the ones that created it in the first place.
I understand that the new QPL is indeed a Free Software license, but is it GPL compatible? Since KDE is licensed under the GPL, if the QPL is not GPL compatible, linking KDE with Qt would be illegal, would it not? IIRC, a license requiring patches is incompatible with the GPL, so this remains the case.
The easiest solution I can see is that KDE could either change the license to LGPL, or provide an exemption for Qt. However, this would require the acquiescence of all the copyright holders of all the GPL'd code they've used.
It needs to be compatible with the GPL, because KDE is licensed under the GPL. Since the QPL is not GPL-compatible, linking KDE with Qt remains illegal.
Facts my ass. Takedown is an extremely biased book, with very few facts in it. It's co-authored by mr. shimomuro (sp?), the egomaniac, and john markoff, the not-quite-competent technology writer for the NY Times.
He didn't hire his lawyer. Not being rich (he didn't use any of those credit card numbers he had), he couldn't afford his own, so he was appointed one by the court.
He would've been better off if he stole a bunch of money with the credit cards and fled the country. Instead he decided not to steal money from people, and he gets stuck in jail while his court-appointed lawyers muck around for 4 years.
I can see why his previous bail-jumping would keep him from getting bail here, but that's not the argument the government used. The government claimed that he would disrupt the 1996 presidential election if he were loose. They even had some Secret Service agents testify about his ability to assassinate somebody.
The justice system is insane. They have this image of Mitnick as a super-hacker who can do anything he wants with electronic equipment. The prison officials even took a way a walkman from him because they were afraid he'd modify it to record conversations. How could he do so with a cassette player that had no recording head?
Incorrect. "Cracker" is a term that describes the talented asm coders who remove copy protection from software. It does not refer to hackers or script kiddies who circumvent computer security. Those who do so are, if they demonstrated considerable talent in finding and exploiting the security hole, rightly considered hackers. If not, they're merely script kiddies.
Anyone know where I can find any more information about the quality of mp3s at various bitrates? Everybody claims that 128kbps is "CD quality," even though it's not really. What improvement in sound quality would 160kbps mp3s have over 128kbps? What about 196kbps or 256kbps? What's a good rate to use if you had, say, a 6.4 gig capacity? Is the difference between 196kbps and 256kbps enough to make it worth using 256kbps, or would that be overkill?
An answer to any/all of these questions, or a link to a nice overview of bitrate/quality issues would be nice =)
Yeah, minidiscs are a fairly nice improvement over CDs, since they add recordability and are smaller, but they still have the problem of being only 74 minutes per disc. Of course, current mp3 players are no better, but if an mp3 player with a capacity of at least 300 MB were to come out, that would allow me to carry around 5 hours of music in one piece, while a minidisc player would force me to carry 4 minidiscs with me in order to have 5 hours of music to listen to.
Slashdot Mirror
Yeah, I guess the entire FSF project, and all the GNU utilities (including gcc) are taboo. You don't think they were using Linux or HURD when they wrote them back in the 80s do you? If it's taboo to develop for a proprietary system, then you have no GNU/Linux OS to work on. I guess everybody has to develop for FreeBSD now.
Why is it that computers and the internet are the only things ever deemed 'inappropriate for children.' If reading alt.atheism is deemed inappropriate for kids to read in a library, why are they still allowed to read ink-on-paper books about atheism? If sites with information about sex are deemed inappropriate to read on a computer, why can kids still check out books on sex and sexuality?
Either that or the people writing the book(s) realized that stoning people was no longer as popular as when the Old Testament was written, so for this religion to catch on, they needed a warmer, fluffier, kinder, gentler version of the Bible (sort of the religious equivalent of "Compassionate Conservatism").
I'm sure there's lots more. I believe infidels.org has a more complete listing, and there was some fairly offensive stuff in there. Certainly stuff most Christians would object to if it was in any other book their kids were being allowed to read.
That's a good start, but how are we supposed to contact them at work with only their home phone numbers?
Well, yeah it'd be 4 total colors, but only 2 greys. In binary:
00 - white
01 - grey #1
10 - grey #2
11 - black
at least i assume that's how it would be done.
Well, it seems that the intent of the Open Source Definition was to be a set of rules defining Free Software. However, it appears that either something is unclear, or people are misinterpreting it.
Richard Stallman says that the APSL is not compliant with the FSF's definition of Free Software.
Eric Raymond says that the APSL is indeed compliant with the Open Source Definition.
Since the Debian president signed onto your letter, it appears that at least part of Debian doesn't consider the APSL to be compliant with the Debian Free Software guidelines.
If it is not Free Software, and is not compliant with the DFSG, how can it be Open Source(tm)? I was under the impression that the Open Source Definition was virtually identical to the DFSG.
FreeBSD != Linux.
They have TONS of differences. Just because FreeBSD can do something, does not mean that Linux can do it (and vice versa). FreeBSD generally seems to be better at being a server. (witness cdrom.com's record-setting FreeBSD server).
No, that's neither a kernel nor a database problem. That's a filesystem problem, showing the limitations of the ext2fs filesystem. A database shouldn't have to implement its own filesystem just because the current one is extremely limited. On BeOS they don't have to either =)
It works fine here. Slashdot renders flawlessly.
I'm using win95 OSR2. What OS are you using? Supposedly it will be identical for all OSs when it's released, but I suppose the various ports may be at slightly different points of the development cycle right now...
well, obviously RMS would.
No, any real person needs one to figure out the obfuscated mess of GUI programming. Linux needs one even more, unless you like spending your life and your sanity trying to learn GUI programming with 34 different toolkits because each of the projects you're supposed to be supporting uses a different toolkit.
I'd rather use a Visual development took for the GUI layout (win32, gtk, qt, whatever), and spend my time coding the actual program.
and you can't even get the alpha unless you're somebody deemed important enough to be given a login/password to the download area for it. the rest of us have to settle for the demo i guess.
Well, I paid $1300 for an Apple //c, 128kb RAM, 12" full-color monitor, in 1984. At the time that was pretty much top-of-the-line. Nowadays all you can get for $1300 is last year's technology.
I wasn't aware that the KDE license had been changed to the LGPL. When did this happen? Was permission for the license change received from all the copyright holders of the third-party GPL code the KDE team has used?
I'm not the one violating licenses, so I have no obligation to fix anything. They need to fix their own licensing mess, since they're the ones that created it in the first place.
I understand that the new QPL is indeed a Free Software license, but is it GPL compatible? Since KDE is licensed under the GPL, if the QPL is not GPL compatible, linking KDE with Qt would be illegal, would it not? IIRC, a license requiring patches is incompatible with the GPL, so this remains the case.
The easiest solution I can see is that KDE could either change the license to LGPL, or provide an exemption for Qt. However, this would require the acquiescence of all the copyright holders of all the GPL'd code they've used.
It needs to be compatible with the GPL, because KDE is licensed under the GPL. Since the QPL is not GPL-compatible, linking KDE with Qt remains illegal.
I've heard that Mitnick is considering suing Mirimax for libel. Has anybody heard anything more about this? He'd certainly have a good case.
Facts my ass. Takedown is an extremely biased book, with very few facts in it. It's co-authored by mr. shimomuro (sp?), the egomaniac, and john markoff, the not-quite-competent technology writer for the NY Times.
He didn't hire his lawyer. Not being rich (he didn't use any of those credit card numbers he had), he couldn't afford his own, so he was appointed one by the court.
He would've been better off if he stole a bunch of money with the credit cards and fled the country. Instead he decided not to steal money from people, and he gets stuck in jail while his court-appointed lawyers muck around for 4 years.
I can see why his previous bail-jumping would keep him from getting bail here, but that's not the argument the government used. The government claimed that he would disrupt the 1996 presidential election if he were loose. They even had some Secret Service agents testify about his ability to assassinate somebody.
The justice system is insane. They have this image of Mitnick as a super-hacker who can do anything he wants with electronic equipment. The prison officials even took a way a walkman from him because they were afraid he'd modify it to record conversations. How could he do so with a cassette player that had no recording head?
Incorrect. "Cracker" is a term that describes the talented asm coders who remove copy protection from software. It does not refer to hackers or script kiddies who circumvent computer security. Those who do so are, if they demonstrated considerable talent in finding and exploiting the security hole, rightly considered hackers. If not, they're merely script kiddies.
Anyone know where I can find any more information about the quality of mp3s at various bitrates? Everybody claims that 128kbps is "CD quality," even though it's not really. What improvement in sound quality would 160kbps mp3s have over 128kbps? What about 196kbps or 256kbps? What's a good rate to use if you had, say, a 6.4 gig capacity? Is the difference between 196kbps and 256kbps enough to make it worth using 256kbps, or would that be overkill?
An answer to any/all of these questions, or a link to a nice overview of bitrate/quality issues would be nice =)
Yeah, minidiscs are a fairly nice improvement over CDs, since they add recordability and are smaller, but they still have the problem of being only 74 minutes per disc. Of course, current mp3 players are no better, but if an mp3 player with a capacity of at least 300 MB were to come out, that would allow me to carry around 5 hours of music in one piece, while a minidisc player would force me to carry 4 minidiscs with me in order to have 5 hours of music to listen to.