I'm sure I don't know what I'm talking about not being an attorney and all but it seems to me this is not a test of the GPL but a test of Copyright infringement. It would have been a test if CherryOS had lived up to the GPL providing the source code and then the developers of PearPC had renigged on the GPL suing CherryOS for copyright infringement. But what do I know?
The end of the U.S. manned space program does not mean the end of manned space flight. I don't understand the assumption that if the U.S. doesn't do something, no one will.
Assuming for the nonce that global garming does not exist but another ice age is just around the corner, wouldn't the extra CO2 tend to ameliorate the ice age?
I recall the ice age doomsday senario popular in the 70s. It's always possible this doomsday senario is correct but I just can't seem to get excited about it.
Perhaps out-sourceing is revenge for the.com fiasco. Out-sourcing has been available for many years. Why is it becomming popular now? I wonder, in part, if the suits blame geeks for the.com crash conveniently forgetting the ridiculous business models.
The ending of the first movie ruined the whole movie. There are lots easier ways of creating a battery than using humans. It just didn't make any sense. I never bothered to watch the sequels.
I no longer enjoy putting together a PC. I certainly have no interest in building my own PC based DVR. I just don't have the patience anymore for the inevitable problems. I am a programmer and would just rather forget about computers for the most part when I'm not working. I put together my current PC. A dual AthlonMP 1600+ running Windows XP. I may never do that again. Perhaps when I retire.
I'm on my 3rd TIVO currently. The first 2 died after over a year of use. I purchased a new TIVO each time and payed for a lifetime subscription to the service since TIVO will not transfer the subscription to a new TIVO. Now my current TIVO's modem is dead. I switched to using my LAN and cable modem to connect to the TIVO service and that worked for a while until I moved. Then I had to go through the setup. It seems you have to have the modem working to finish the TIVO setup. Therefore, I'm in a catch 22. I cannot use the TIVO until I finish the setup. I cannot finish the setup without the modem working. The modem is integrated on the motherboard so I cannot replace it without replacing the motherboard.
I could buy another TIVO and the subscription but after three bad TIVOs I'm not inclined to do so. I could send it back to the manufacturer.
Perhaps I should just build my own. At least I could replace parts as needed when they go bad. I've avoided using Linux up to this point since it isn't necessary for my work. The question is, is it worth it? Should I just forget about owning a DVR? I really like selecting shows to record and letting the TIVO figure out the times the show is on and automatically recording for me. How about my cable set top box? My TIVO can control it so I can record the digital channels. Is that feature possible with a home made DVR?
I don't need it explained. I'm aware of all of that. I was just trying to look a little deeper. CxOs could have done this a long time ago. What's different?
I'm quite aware it's proper to use the male pronoun. The reason the author used female pronouns is to be politically correct or more correctly not to be politically incorrect. Feminists decry the usage of male pronouns because it's male centric. The author is willing to risk being considered illiterate to be politically correct. That I find silly. Your correct though that males outnumbering females is not an issue. It was a gratuitous comment. That's allowed right?
I've been considering why it's now getting so popular to outsource IT overseas. Perhaps in part the investors/executives have a vendetta against IT professionals because of the.com fiasco.
Certainly there are other factors like improved communications and a better educated foreign workforce. I even wonder if the quality of CS programs in American colleges are as high as they should be.
I've noticed this often these days. It's really silly. In the IT field males greatly outnumber females. I play DAoC and the manual is written with female pronouns when the vast majority playing are male. When it comes to mostly female occupations, I've noticed male pronouns are used. Like in nursing or office management. I guess these are considered less desired occupations so it's politically incorrect to use female pronouns.
The same political correctness seems to apply to television programs and commercials. You often have male characters portrayed as stupid. These characters used to be played by blond women. It's interesting to note that humor often relies on someone being stupid. So it goes. There doesn't seem to be any happy mediums when it comes to cyclical changes. The pendulum swings from one extreme to another.
When I was a lad in college, it was politically incorrect, although we didn't use that term, to open the door for women. We'd even go so far as to open the door for a man and allow it to swing in the face of a woman. At least today opening the door for a woman isn't considered demeaning.
Posts like this makes me wonder what an army of disgruntled, unemployed hackers would be able to do to the IT infrastructure. We might be in for some interesting times!
I also wonder whether the outsourcing is a reaction to the failure of the.coms. Perhaps investors that lost a lot of money have a vendetta against 'puter geeks.
It's probably an age thing. The astronomers were probably driving VW beetles during the 60s when they were plentiful and popular among the hippie culture.
"Global cooling" - which was popular a few centuries ago - is actually more likely to happen.
You mean a few decades ago. When I was a lad going to college in the 70s, there was a concern we were entering an ice age. I have sometimes wondered if scientists make up these apocolyptic theories to gain funding for research. If so, more power to them. There isn't enough investment in basic research anyway.
Anyway, global warming will happen eventually. In 5 billion years the sun will run out of hydrogen fuel at it's center and begin fusing helium at which point we are toast. I hope to be around to see it.;)
The F-117 can be seen visually. Perhaps that's how they knew to fire.
I recall during Kosovo that a F-117 was shot down. Perhaps Serbia (another enemy we have created) passed along some technology. It was theorized at the time that the Chinese may have given some technology to Serbia.
Re:Here's a different perspective
on
Strike on Iraq
·
· Score: 1
Yea. I guess my response was off topic. I just become pedantic when it comes to history.
Don't know from religion myself. Any religion or pseudo-religion you can name I'm not. I prefer to go without. The religion of perpetrators is irrelevant.
Never thought about the Babylon 5 connection. Loved the show for the first 2 years or so.
Gratz on the mod. Highest I've ever had is 2. Haven't posted much though.
I agree pretty much with the first paragraph. I don't understand what you mean about sacrificing Americans or willing allies, etc. Do you mean we should kill an American or ally for ever Iraqi killed?
It is obvious many in the Administration were against going through the United Nations. Rumsfeld, Wolfowitz, Cheney and perhaps the President himself. I believe they sabotaged Colin Powells efforts with comments like the "Old Europe" statement and the president declaring we would go to war whatever the UN did.
In the last Gulf war members of the coalition restricted targets we could hit. Rumsfeld said he wouldn't let it happen this time. That is just one reason he was sabotaging efforts to get the UN behind the war.
I don't think a world government/democracy as you suggest would be possible or desireable. There is too much enmity between peoples for it to be fair.
Technically, the US government and almost all other so called democracies are not democracies. They are republics where politicians are elected to represent the voters. A true democracy would have voters vote on every issue/bill, etc. They are designed that way for several reasons, one of which is that popular opinion isn't always the best policy. Politicians are supposed to make up their own minds with puplic opinion as a factor but ultimately politicians make the decisions. Therefore, war protests won't necessarily change politicians minds.
American Isolationism
on
Strike on Iraq
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
Before WWII the US was a rabidly isolationist country. Over 90% of Americans were against going to war until Pearl Harbor.
After the war, the US became a "Super Power" (a term I really hate btw) as a counter balance against the Soviets. It is quite probable the Soviet Union would have overrun the rest of Europe without the US presence.
Now we are the lone "Super Power". No one wants a Super Power, even a benevolent one, without some counter balance. Also, there is always pressure from allies and from our own politicians to use that power for their own national/political interests. An example of this is the Bosnia/Kosovo wars. Our allies in Nato put pressure on the US to get involved there. Another example is Somalia. As long as the US is out front in military confrontations, even justified ones, we will continue to create enmity even with those who wanted us to get involved.
I see 2 paths we can take here. We can continue slowly becomming more imperialistic in response to attacks by people we have made enemies creating even more enemies in the process or we can begin withdrawing our military from bases all over the world. I for one favor the latter. It is time for a return to isolationism.
We can keep the bloated, unnecessary military budget as long as the military takes in people our schools are unable to educate and teach them. We can keep the bases within the US that politicians find so hard to close for political and economic reasons. It would be a social/education program of sorts. Perhaps not the most efficient one but it would have more political support and the military/industrial complex would go along with it.
Re:Here's a different perspective
on
Strike on Iraq
·
· Score: 1
It was definitely wrong for the US to support Saddam during the Iran/Iraq war. It was wrong morally and strategically.
Going further back, the US should not have helped the British overthrow the Iranian government after WWII and put the Shaw in power. That lead indirectly to the rise of Khomeni and the rise of Islamic fundamentalism in Iran along with the takeover of the US embassy.
IMHO I think we should have acted directly ourselves and not through a proxy against the Iranian government when our embassy was taken. Under international law, an embassy is the sovereign land not of the country it is in but the country that owns the embassy. As such, attacking one is an act of war. The pathetic attempt at a rescue of the embassy staff was one of the worse military blunders during my lifetime.
If this keeps up I can imagine some interesting repercussions.
1. What kind of damage could and army of disgruntled, out of work hackers do?
2. Would Open Source suddenly find many more volunteers to make companies products worthless?
3. What about the possibility of economic terrorism by programmers comming into this country via H1Bs?
Slashdot Mirror
I'm sure I don't know what I'm talking about not being an attorney and all but it seems to me this is not a test of the GPL but a test of Copyright infringement. It would have been a test if CherryOS had lived up to the GPL providing the source code and then the developers of PearPC had renigged on the GPL suing CherryOS for copyright infringement. But what do I know?
Without the threat of punitive damages, why would someone pay any attention to the GPL?
The end of the U.S. manned space program does not mean the end of manned space flight. I don't understand the assumption that if the U.S. doesn't do something, no one will.
Assuming for the nonce that global garming does not exist but another ice age is just around the corner, wouldn't the extra CO2 tend to ameliorate the ice age? I recall the ice age doomsday senario popular in the 70s. It's always possible this doomsday senario is correct but I just can't seem to get excited about it.
Perhaps out-sourceing is revenge for the .com fiasco. Out-sourcing has been available for many years. Why is it becomming popular now? I wonder, in part, if the suits blame geeks for the .com crash conveniently forgetting the ridiculous business models.
The ending of the first movie ruined the whole movie. There are lots easier ways of creating a battery than using humans. It just didn't make any sense. I never bothered to watch the sequels.
I'm on my 3rd TIVO currently. The first 2 died after over a year of use. I purchased a new TIVO each time and payed for a lifetime subscription to the service since TIVO will not transfer the subscription to a new TIVO. Now my current TIVO's modem is dead. I switched to using my LAN and cable modem to connect to the TIVO service and that worked for a while until I moved. Then I had to go through the setup. It seems you have to have the modem working to finish the TIVO setup. Therefore, I'm in a catch 22. I cannot use the TIVO until I finish the setup. I cannot finish the setup without the modem working. The modem is integrated on the motherboard so I cannot replace it without replacing the motherboard.
I could buy another TIVO and the subscription but after three bad TIVOs I'm not inclined to do so. I could send it back to the manufacturer.
Perhaps I should just build my own. At least I could replace parts as needed when they go bad. I've avoided using Linux up to this point since it isn't necessary for my work. The question is, is it worth it? Should I just forget about owning a DVR? I really like selecting shows to record and letting the TIVO figure out the times the show is on and automatically recording for me. How about my cable set top box? My TIVO can control it so I can record the digital channels. Is that feature possible with a home made DVR?
As good a reason as any.
Yes. I've gone back to opening the door for women. I don't get the strange stares anymore.
I don't need it explained. I'm aware of all of that. I was just trying to look a little deeper. CxOs could have done this a long time ago. What's different?
I'm quite aware it's proper to use the male pronoun. The reason the author used female pronouns is to be politically correct or more correctly not to be politically incorrect. Feminists decry the usage of male pronouns because it's male centric. The author is willing to risk being considered illiterate to be politically correct. That I find silly. Your correct though that males outnumbering females is not an issue. It was a gratuitous comment. That's allowed right?
I've been considering why it's now getting so popular to outsource IT overseas. Perhaps in part the investors/executives have a vendetta against IT professionals because of the .com fiasco.
Certainly there are other factors like improved communications and a better educated foreign workforce. I even wonder if the quality of CS programs in American colleges are as high as they should be.
I've noticed this often these days. It's really silly. In the IT field males greatly outnumber females. I play DAoC and the manual is written with female pronouns when the vast majority playing are male. When it comes to mostly female occupations, I've noticed male pronouns are used. Like in nursing or office management. I guess these are considered less desired occupations so it's politically incorrect to use female pronouns.
The same political correctness seems to apply to television programs and commercials. You often have male characters portrayed as stupid. These characters used to be played by blond women. It's interesting to note that humor often relies on someone being stupid. So it goes. There doesn't seem to be any happy mediums when it comes to cyclical changes. The pendulum swings from one extreme to another.
When I was a lad in college, it was politically incorrect, although we didn't use that term, to open the door for women. We'd even go so far as to open the door for a man and allow it to swing in the face of a woman. At least today opening the door for a woman isn't considered demeaning.
Posts like this makes me wonder what an army of disgruntled, unemployed hackers would be able to do to the IT infrastructure. We might be in for some interesting times!
.coms. Perhaps investors that lost a lot of money have a vendetta against 'puter geeks.
I also wonder whether the outsourcing is a reaction to the failure of the
It's probably an age thing. The astronomers were probably driving VW beetles during the 60s when they were plentiful and popular among the hippie culture.
Good point! Although sharing a cable modem among several PCs may "defraud" the ISP if the ISP charges for extra internet connections.
"Global cooling" - which was popular a few centuries ago - is actually more likely to happen.
;)
You mean a few decades ago. When I was a lad going to college in the 70s, there was a concern we were entering an ice age. I have sometimes wondered if scientists make up these apocolyptic theories to gain funding for research. If so, more power to them. There isn't enough investment in basic research anyway.
Anyway, global warming will happen eventually. In 5 billion years the sun will run out of hydrogen fuel at it's center and begin fusing helium at which point we are toast. I hope to be around to see it.
I do now :)
The F-117 can be seen visually. Perhaps that's how they knew to fire.
I recall during Kosovo that a F-117 was shot down. Perhaps Serbia (another enemy we have created) passed along some technology. It was theorized at the time that the Chinese may have given some technology to Serbia.
Yea. I guess my response was off topic. I just become pedantic when it comes to history.
Don't know from religion myself. Any religion or pseudo-religion you can name I'm not. I prefer to go without. The religion of perpetrators is irrelevant.
Never thought about the Babylon 5 connection. Loved the show for the first 2 years or so.
Gratz on the mod. Highest I've ever had is 2. Haven't posted much though.
I agree pretty much with the first paragraph. I don't understand what you mean about sacrificing Americans or willing allies, etc. Do you mean we should kill an American or ally for ever Iraqi killed?
It is obvious many in the Administration were against going through the United Nations. Rumsfeld, Wolfowitz, Cheney and perhaps the President himself. I believe they sabotaged Colin Powells efforts with comments like the "Old Europe" statement and the president declaring we would go to war whatever the UN did.
In the last Gulf war members of the coalition restricted targets we could hit. Rumsfeld said he wouldn't let it happen this time. That is just one reason he was sabotaging efforts to get the UN behind the war.
I don't think a world government/democracy as you suggest would be possible or desireable. There is too much enmity between peoples for it to be fair.
Technically, the US government and almost all other so called democracies are not democracies. They are republics where politicians are elected to represent the voters. A true democracy would have voters vote on every issue/bill, etc. They are designed that way for several reasons, one of which is that popular opinion isn't always the best policy. Politicians are supposed to make up their own minds with puplic opinion as a factor but ultimately politicians make the decisions. Therefore, war protests won't necessarily change politicians minds.
Before WWII the US was a rabidly isolationist country. Over 90% of Americans were against going to war until Pearl Harbor.
After the war, the US became a "Super Power" (a term I really hate btw) as a counter balance against the Soviets. It is quite probable the Soviet Union would have overrun the rest of Europe without the US presence.
Now we are the lone "Super Power". No one wants a Super Power, even a benevolent one, without some counter balance. Also, there is always pressure from allies and from our own politicians to use that power for their own national/political interests. An example of this is the Bosnia/Kosovo wars. Our allies in Nato put pressure on the US to get involved there. Another example is Somalia. As long as the US is out front in military confrontations, even justified ones, we will continue to create enmity even with those who wanted us to get involved.
I see 2 paths we can take here. We can continue slowly becomming more imperialistic in response to attacks by people we have made enemies creating even more enemies in the process or we can begin withdrawing our military from bases all over the world. I for one favor the latter. It is time for a return to isolationism.
We can keep the bloated, unnecessary military budget as long as the military takes in people our schools are unable to educate and teach them. We can keep the bases within the US that politicians find so hard to close for political and economic reasons. It would be a social/education program of sorts. Perhaps not the most efficient one but it would have more political support and the military/industrial complex would go along with it.
It was definitely wrong for the US to support Saddam during the Iran/Iraq war. It was wrong morally and strategically. Going further back, the US should not have helped the British overthrow the Iranian government after WWII and put the Shaw in power. That lead indirectly to the rise of Khomeni and the rise of Islamic fundamentalism in Iran along with the takeover of the US embassy. IMHO I think we should have acted directly ourselves and not through a proxy against the Iranian government when our embassy was taken. Under international law, an embassy is the sovereign land not of the country it is in but the country that owns the embassy. As such, attacking one is an act of war. The pathetic attempt at a rescue of the embassy staff was one of the worse military blunders during my lifetime.
What category should it be under?
If this keeps up I can imagine some interesting repercussions. 1. What kind of damage could and army of disgruntled, out of work hackers do? 2. Would Open Source suddenly find many more volunteers to make companies products worthless? 3. What about the possibility of economic terrorism by programmers comming into this country via H1Bs?