Excellent point. I had not thought about the potential that would exist between say the bow and stern of a ship. I imagine just moving through the water would generate charges.
If it is a military vessel, then they would have to consider the degaussing equipment that is on most military ships. That's the only reason I can imagine using shielded cable. Unless of course it was running around high emf emitting equipment such as radar.
If it is not a military vessel, grounding is not really necessary. However on a military vessel, the requirements imposed by the government may be different.
I help administer a small software library where users are allowed to borrow CD's for a few days to install various software packages (yes, it is all legal, futher explanation is not necessary).
Considering your jump of the gun there, and the previous post, I agree, just burn a buttload of em and charge for the CD.
Unless of course that smell permeating from this story is BS and johnnylaw will come bangin on your door, in which case, nevermind.
Yes, but upon adding their prop. code to the GPL distribution, the GPL status falls away, does it not? Unless they wish to release the prop.code under GPL also. In that case, the whole lot is no longer under GPL. Correct? Perhaps I am (-2, quite confused).
Slashdot Mirror
Actually, I wouldn't mind seeing the eradication of all muslims from the planet. World peace would be right around the corner from that.
Yes, Big Brother IS watching... 1984
Excellent point. I had not thought about the potential that would exist between say the bow and stern of a ship. I imagine just moving through the water would generate charges.
If it is a military vessel, then they would have to consider the degaussing equipment that is on most military ships. That's the only reason I can imagine using shielded cable. Unless of course it was running around high emf emitting equipment such as radar. If it is not a military vessel, grounding is not really necessary. However on a military vessel, the requirements imposed by the government may be different.
Actually, it's beat the air into submission
Yes, but upon adding their prop. code to the GPL distribution, the GPL status falls away, does it not? Unless they wish to release the prop.code under GPL also. In that case, the whole lot is no longer under GPL. Correct? Perhaps I am (-2, quite confused).
What? Why are my eyes crossed after reading this post?
Can't you countersue based on the fact that they shouldn't have added their proprietary code to a GPL'd software distribution in the first place?
The only post with decent advice and it gets modded to a 1? What are you guys, on some serious crack or what?