I would argue that Mandella had influence, but not power.
Mandela in the end became president of a major regional power, and leader of the party holding absolute parliamentary majority. At his word, soldiers marched. That's power, not influence. The distinction between influence and power is still important though, even when it's blurred.
I missed the original question round, but are there any plans for cross-language dictionaries?
They'd be mighty useful, and might even support open-source machine translation efforts. Besides, the idea of a trolled hungarian-english dictionary would make for a hilarious skit.
You only need patents if you want to sue and make money of them.
Well, in case $HUGECORP sends you a C&D to stop publishing your OS program because of patent infringement what do you do? If you have no patents of your own you'll have to either fight or fold, and fighting's too expensive. The alternative will be for you to threaten a countersuit, in case you or your friends have a patent. Did you ever intend to make money from your patent? No. Did you ever plan to sue anyone? No. But you want the patent anyway - just like a nuclear bomb you never want to use, but need to have because the other guy does.
OS community will never *force* others to cross license, nor will it apply for patents.
If this is a common practise, then redhat/suse/ibm etc might go ahead and do it.
That's an awful lot of prediction of the future. You may be right, but I'd like to know how you know.
You don't have to play a game if you don't like the rules. It's that simple.
I deeply wish it was that way. Unfortunately you can't write software without infringing on patents, so in this case staying out of the game means "don't publish software". Are you really planning to stay out of that game?
You can find what's more or less an expanded version of this article
here.
Quote:
The NSA has not fixed, or even seriously tried to fix, the security problems (documented in this series of white papers) that make Linux unsafe for defense systems.
[...]
If secrecy isn't important to security, then why does Linus Torvalds keep the means of accessing the core Linux development tree a secret from all but a few people?
You only need patents if you want to sue and make money of them.
What? Larry Rosen made that mistake in the article, and it's been blasted in, like, 300 comments and now you make it again? Besides, the Open Source community might like to have patents to force others to cross-licence. That's a very common practice among large companies, but you can only join if you bring something to the table.
As titusjan says in a reply below yours, they actually every now and then show the helo pics in replay. (I've seen that a few times, but forgot.) So, they don't seem to mind the safety. Besides, I don't want the pictures from the front - I want them from above.
As for distinguishing the riders - I'm quite capable of that. I just don't know which one is in the lead, which is quite interesting the last 200m of the stage.
I have no problem with people using copyright to charge for their software - it seems to me both parties get something from the deal. But it has to happen in a free market, and in the free market the price of information has fallen and can't get up.
As Shirky says: The price of information has not only gone into free fall in the last few years, it is still in free fall now, it will continue to fall long before it hits bottom, and when it does whole categories of currently lucrative businesses will be either transfigured unrecognizably or completely wiped out, and there is nothing anyone can do about it.
Nor should we. Industrialization wiped out the weavers' guilds, most of the farming population and the horse-cart manufacturers - and we're better off for it. The winds of change are blowing again. Let's tear down the windbreaks and build windmills instead.
In the outside world, all forms of intelligence whether of sound or sight, have been reduced to the form of varying currents in an electric circuit in order that they may be transmitted. Inside the human frame exactly the same sort of process occurs. Must we always transform to mechanical movements in order to proceed from one electrical phenomenon to another?
If they started using the helicopter cams for the sprints. They're always filming the sprints from ground-based cameras in front of the riders with ridiculous amounts of zoom. You have no chance to see who's in the lead or who's coming up fast or falling behind. Instead you have to rely on the commentator stuttering the name of whatever rider's in the lead. Hey, it's not radio, it's TV - I want to see it.
They've got the chopper hanging around all afternoon anyway, so what's the big deal?
However, quantum computing also provides a secure means of communication.
Not really. The fact is that these two technologies are totally independent - it is quite possible to achieve one of them while being a long way from the other.
For instance, quantum encryption (non-eavesdroppable comm) is already on the high-end commercial market. Quantum computing (quick factorization) is not. IBM factored 15 into 3 and 5 with a quantum computer, but their approach doesn't scale. Lots of labs are working on this.
Now, many people see quantum encryption as the logical answer to quantum computing. It is, but not a very practical answer. Remember that you have to have a direct physical connection to use quantum encryption. Alternatively you should build a chain of quantum links, and then
trust all routers, switches etc. along the way. Not very useful for Internet traffic.
Wait till it comes out for your distro. Proprietary software is often written and packaged in the same company and they release nothing until installer etc. etc. is ready. Open source programs are often written and packaged by different persons, and the first person considers the program "released" when the tarball's ready.
Midi really ought to work though - even if you're not "geeky". What distro are you using?
We need a standardized protocol for creating/redirecting mail addresses. Then mail clients (or other desktop programs) could implement this. There's a lot of people using their own domains now, so sooner or later it some free-software-hacker should scratch his itch and do it.
It's also about films, music etc. 90+% of the popular music heard here in Denmark is in english. (A lot of it made by danes in Denmark). Perhaps 75% of tv is in english, and the market is too small to warrant doing anything but subtitling the films. So, it's much easier for a dane to pick up english, than for an american to pick up, say, french or spanish.
The net is about exchanging information easily and accross the world.
No. That's how YOU use it. I know lots of people who basically only use the net in danish. (And it's not like danish is a world language). I personally get a lot more out of the net when using english, since I'm involved in different cross-border communities/activities, and you may feel the same way, but that's how OUR calculation falls out.
I think my main point here is that the net is not "about" anything. It merely exists, being used for billions of different purposes by billions of different humans.
It's only the producer's and performers' rights that expire after 50 years in the EU. This means that you won't have to pay the performers or the record company to use the record. However, the rights of the composer and text author will remain to 70 years after their death (AKA forever minus a day).
If you spread the recording without some sort of agreement (through contract or compulsory licensing) with the composer or writer, you'll acquire liability and might very well be sued.
In 1999 a german Doctor gained the confidence of the regime. Getting behind the 70ies-kitschy facade, he came back to report on the oppression and poverty.
Google will find you lots of interviews about his experiences.
I think if you invest in a company, you should that company [??? sic] and have to bide by it's decisions. If those decisions make the stock go down (as long as it's ethical) than tough shit.
No. As a shareholder you own part of the company. The directors are on your payroll and should obey you, not the other way round. (After all, it's your money on the line). The problem alledged by the suit is that the CEOs released insufficient information. How are you as a shareholder going to control the company, if you can't know what's going on?
It's not even correctly quoted. I doubt the nazi regime would have "come for the catholics" since they're just as many as the protestants. It would have been VERY stupid politically.
Slashdot Mirror
Mandela in the end became president of a major regional power, and leader of the party holding absolute parliamentary majority. At his word, soldiers marched. That's power, not influence. The distinction between influence and power is still important though, even when it's blurred.
They'd be mighty useful, and might even support open-source machine translation efforts. Besides, the idea of a trolled hungarian-english dictionary would make for a hilarious skit.
Well you did say:
You only need patents if you want to sue and make money of them.
Well, in case $HUGECORP sends you a C&D to stop publishing your OS program because of patent infringement what do you do? If you have no patents of your own you'll have to either fight or fold, and fighting's too expensive. The alternative will be for you to threaten a countersuit, in case you or your friends have a patent. Did you ever intend to make money from your patent? No. Did you ever plan to sue anyone? No. But you want the patent anyway - just like a nuclear bomb you never want to use, but need to have because the other guy does.
OS community will never *force* others to cross license, nor will it apply for patents. If this is a common practise, then redhat/suse/ibm etc might go ahead and do it.
That's an awful lot of prediction of the future. You may be right, but I'd like to know how you know.
You don't have to play a game if you don't like the rules. It's that simple.
I deeply wish it was that way. Unfortunately you can't write software without infringing on patents, so in this case staying out of the game means "don't publish software". Are you really planning to stay out of that game?
Quote: The NSA has not fixed, or even seriously tried to fix, the security problems (documented in this series of white papers) that make Linux unsafe for defense systems.
[...] If secrecy isn't important to security, then why does Linus Torvalds keep the means of accessing the core Linux development tree a secret from all but a few people?
Another FUD dose says
The GPL was designed by Richard Stallman to prevent you from making a profit from distributing his software (which makes up a large part of Linux).
You only need patents if you want to sue and make money of them.
What? Larry Rosen made that mistake in the article, and it's been blasted in, like, 300 comments and now you make it again? Besides, the Open Source community might like to have patents to force others to cross-licence. That's a very common practice among large companies, but you can only join if you bring something to the table.
As titusjan says in a reply below yours, they actually every now and then show the helo pics in replay. (I've seen that a few times, but forgot.) So, they don't seem to mind the safety. Besides, I don't want the pictures from the front - I want them from above.
As for distinguishing the riders - I'm quite capable of that. I just don't know which one is in the lead, which is quite interesting the last 200m of the stage.
I have no problem with people using copyright to charge for their software - it seems to me both parties get something from the deal. But it has to happen in a free market, and in the free market the price of information has fallen and can't get up.
As Shirky says: The price of information has not only gone into free fall in the last few years, it is still in free fall now, it will continue to fall long before it hits bottom, and when it does whole categories of currently lucrative businesses will be either transfigured unrecognizably or completely wiped out, and there is nothing anyone can do about it.
Nor should we. Industrialization wiped out the weavers' guilds, most of the farming population and the horse-cart manufacturers - and we're better off for it. The winds of change are blowing again. Let's tear down the windbreaks and build windmills instead.
by Vannevar Bush in his prophetic paper As We May Think :
In the outside world, all forms of intelligence whether of sound or sight, have been reduced to the form of varying currents in an electric circuit in order that they may be transmitted. Inside the human frame exactly the same sort of process occurs. Must we always transform to mechanical movements in order to proceed from one electrical phenomenon to another?
Read the whole paper. It's really amazing.
If they started using the helicopter cams for the sprints. They're always filming the sprints from ground-based cameras in front of the riders with ridiculous amounts of zoom. You have no chance to see who's in the lead or who's coming up fast or falling behind. Instead you have to rely on the commentator stuttering the name of whatever rider's in the lead. Hey, it's not radio, it's TV - I want to see it.
They've got the chopper hanging around all afternoon anyway, so what's the big deal?
Maybe if he could see his opponent he wouldn't be kicked so often?
And you can't imagine the feeling you have when you crush your coke bottle glasses and toss them in the trash. :)
That would just have to be the feeling when donating them to deliver someone else from blindness.
I really sympathize with your sentiment though - I'm quite myopic myself.
However, quantum computing also provides a secure means of communication.
Not really. The fact is that these two technologies are totally independent - it is quite possible to achieve one of them while being a long way from the other.
For instance, quantum encryption (non-eavesdroppable comm) is already on the high-end commercial market. Quantum computing (quick factorization) is not. IBM factored 15 into 3 and 5 with a quantum computer, but their approach doesn't scale. Lots of labs are working on this.
Now, many people see quantum encryption as the logical answer to quantum computing. It is, but not a very practical answer. Remember that you have to have a direct physical connection to use quantum encryption. Alternatively you should build a chain of quantum links, and then trust all routers, switches etc. along the way. Not very useful for Internet traffic.
there is a little footer with teh "recycled" symbol and the phrase "printed on recycled paper" ? it's a PDF.
The obvious conclusion is that your screen is made out of recycled paper. What we need now is GPL-licensed origami patterns for 17" flatscreens...
Wait till it comes out for your distro. Proprietary software is often written and packaged in the same company and they release nothing until installer etc. etc. is ready. Open source programs are often written and packaged by different persons, and the first person considers the program "released" when the tarball's ready.
Midi really ought to work though - even if you're not "geeky". What distro are you using?
We need a standardized protocol for creating/redirecting mail addresses. Then mail clients (or other desktop programs) could implement this. There's a lot of people using their own domains now, so sooner or later it some free-software-hacker should scratch his itch and do it.
It's also about films, music etc. 90+% of the popular music heard here in Denmark is in english. (A lot of it made by danes in Denmark). Perhaps 75% of tv is in english, and the market is too small to warrant doing anything but subtitling the films. So, it's much easier for a dane to pick up english, than for an american to pick up, say, french or spanish.
The net is about exchanging information easily and accross the world.
No. That's how YOU use it. I know lots of people who basically only use the net in danish. (And it's not like danish is a world language). I personally get a lot more out of the net when using english, since I'm involved in different cross-border communities/activities, and you may feel the same way, but that's how OUR calculation falls out.
I think my main point here is that the net is not "about" anything. It merely exists, being used for billions of different purposes by billions of different humans.
It's only the producer's and performers' rights that expire after 50 years in the EU. This means that you won't have to pay the performers or the record company to use the record. However, the rights of the composer and text author will remain to 70 years after their death (AKA forever minus a day).
If you spread the recording without some sort of agreement (through contract or compulsory licensing) with the composer or writer, you'll acquire liability and might very well be sued.
According to this page, the DPRK elite schools use win98-en. (No net connection, perhaps for the risk of virii?)
In 1999 a german Doctor gained the confidence of the regime. Getting behind the 70ies-kitschy facade, he came back to report on the oppression and poverty.
Google will find you lots of interviews about his experiences.
It's nice to a pioneer, who certainly not a household name, get such a high honour from the establishment.
/. editors submission low amount of verb (surely not grammatical correctness nazi).
It's nice to
That sounds quite a bit like what Stallman advocates
I think if you invest in a company, you should that company [??? sic] and have to bide by it's decisions. If those decisions make the stock go down (as long as it's ethical) than tough shit.
No. As a shareholder you own part of the company. The directors are on your payroll and should obey you, not the other way round. (After all, it's your money on the line). The problem alledged by the suit is that the CEOs released insufficient information. How are you as a shareholder going to control the company, if you can't know what's going on?
It's not even correctly quoted. I doubt the nazi regime would have "come for the catholics" since they're just as many as the protestants. It would have been VERY stupid politically.
at the moment the European Union is just as bad, if not worse.
For those who doubt imogthe's words, read this document (Acroread only, sorry) It's a draft decision by the EU council of ministers to require all telecommunications logged, and data stored for a year. Wish I was kidding...