No but an OEM license from a junk'd windows DOES cut it. No matter what myths are spread OEM licenses are completely transferable OEM's are just required to sell them with qualifying hardware.
Re:The only bank in town
on
Wine 1.2 Released
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
Get an account with a real bank and keep the crappy account. Deposit checks and then transfer out to your real bank, transfer in when you need cash (or just use your debit).
In the modern world where you can use your debit card pretty much anywhere for any purchase of 50 cents or more with no fees how often do you really need cash? For that matter, unless you are running a business, how often do you receive cash and checks? Or really cash, you can mail check deposits.
If you absolutely have to have a physical presence I'd couple it with a real account and use it for temporary funds holding. Maybe attach it to an all digital account.
Get a new bank. No really, banks more or less all offer the same crappy free ridden services and use the same bogus anti-client reporting systems. And all the major ones charge other people to cash checks you write them at the counter.
The IE only issue sounds like about as big a difference as you'll find between banks.
"you'll find a lot more regular joes and janes picking up this stuff on DVD from blackmarket dealers around the world"
Yeah, because you just see those all over the place. Seriously, I've seen one guy selling bootleg dvd's and music outside a store in Miami, once, in my life. I've never seen the same for software.
That is in Miami (along with any other of the populous areas on either FL coast), Chicago, St. Louis, Portland, Albuquerque, Reno, Vegas, I didn't spend much time there but that includes LA as well. I haven't seen street vendors of any kind (except maybe a hot dog cart or the like) outside those larger metro areas. Mostly "street vendors" amounts to bums with gold chains and brand new designer sneakers outside the bus/train/plane stations.
Coding macros in OOBasic is cake. Doing the same thing in VB is a mind bending exercise in traversing API documentation and finding the right interfaces to do what you want.
Seriously, that is called I know API x and this app is hard because it uses API y.
If you can't give up something you have learned and learn something new then computers just aren't for you.
If it doesn't work straight off or with a simple well documented fix I don't bother. I look for another solution. Usually the best solution is to run a native app.
They lied there is a third party DX 10 on XP installation. No real modifications were needed except to remove checks in the installation that deliberately block the install and execution.
There is nothing there that couldn't have been done in XP SP4 and almost all of that is something that was intentionally made deficient to increase sales of the new product. For example, there is a hack to install the new direct x versions on XP because there is no technical reason they can't run with full features.
"Windows 7 (and Vista?)"
If you are going to pretend those are different OS then I'm not sure we can even have a conversation.
True enough, but that is ignoring the millions of years of stored up solar energy in the form of other plants and animals. Plus one can assume the machines of the future have a nearly 100% efficient system and reuse their own waste heat.
You estimates of the amount of meat it takes, are they for a motionless human in a vegetative state or a real human that moves, grow muscles, etc?
The humans get their energy from the nutrient filled goo. DUH. Where do they get the nutrients for the goo you ask? From the dead humans! DUH.
Obviously it's a depleting system with fewer and fewer humans to be gotten each time around. But one can also assume that when the sky was blacked out there was vegetation and vegetable and animal organics. The machines could have found a way to convert that into sugars (along with the other dead humans of course) and nutrients to feed the humans.
There is quite a bit of organic energy already here.
Perk? Maybe not, but caffeine improves focus, cognition, and memory recall. At least that is what these studies show, and most of them account for withdraw.
My other comments aside. It doesn't matter what the term originally meant. TODAY the term open source universally and without exception refers to using an OSI approved license.
Using it in any other way TODAY is an attempt at fraud regardless of what anyone might think the term meant historically.
Once upon a time a faggot was a bundle of sticks. Today it is a term to refer to a homosexual (with derogatory overtones). The only time you'd ever hear it refer to sticks/wood is as part of a comic relief act.
Open doesn't imply free. Simply being able to redistribute doesn't mean the software is free. "Free" in the free software sense means FSF approved license. "Open source" means OSI approved license.
Simply providing source code with no additional rights is neither since it wouldn't meet the requirements.
"open source" complies with the OSI requirements, simply making source available to someone does not meet the requirements. "free" means it complies with the FSF free software philosophy, again, simply allowing redistribution isn't enough.
"You've mixed up "open" and "free". Different terms meaning different things."
Not at all. You are just mistaken on what those terms mean in this context.
And? That wouldn't prevent you from downloading the GPL'd source from the linksys support page and distributing it to others who hadn't bought linksys routers.
I wouldn't disagree. Caldera used the term correctly, to refer to Linux and Free Software. As far as I know the term was originally synonymous with free software and redefined and formalized with OSI standards. This was in response to businesses that simply provided source access in some form abusing the term.
But free software is the original open source so redistribution is still implicit. There was nothing in what you quoted to indicate otherwise.
Open source is OSI. FSF free software is a different standard with different requirements.
You sound like a replay to the days of Microsoft trying to pawn their license as "open source". A battle they lost and ultimately caved to pressure and renamed to "shared source."
"It's nice, unambiguous, is an existing term and doesn't confuse half the software world which is still filled with people like me who recall Open Source meaning only that the source code is available."
Misremembering. Unfortunately, the world is indeed still filled with confused people who authoritatively claim inaccurate information. Did you know humans only use 10% of their brain?
No free software is something else altogether. Open source software does not just mean the source is "open", open source software is licensed under an OSI approved open source license and there are requirements.
"Essentially, only avoiding the specific case of people pawning off my direct unmodified works individually. Which is the only thing I objected to in the first place."
This wasn't a thread about what you objected to. This was a thread about forking the enterprise product once a paid customer got the source. You claimed a license could have been used that prevented that and still be open source. That is false. No license that is OSI FSF approved could prevent forking.
Simply removing the trademarked branding from the project would constitute a derivative.
Slashdot Mirror
It's a Bloomberg story, not a gizmodo story.
Puritan, there's nothing wrong with a little exposed cell flesh. It's perfectly natural.
No but an OEM license from a junk'd windows DOES cut it. No matter what myths are spread OEM licenses are completely transferable OEM's are just required to sell them with qualifying hardware.
Or upgraded away from activex
Get an account with a real bank and keep the crappy account. Deposit checks and then transfer out to your real bank, transfer in when you need cash (or just use your debit).
In the modern world where you can use your debit card pretty much anywhere for any purchase of 50 cents or more with no fees how often do you really need cash? For that matter, unless you are running a business, how often do you receive cash and checks? Or really cash, you can mail check deposits.
If you absolutely have to have a physical presence I'd couple it with a real account and use it for temporary funds holding. Maybe attach it to an all digital account.
Get a new bank. No really, banks more or less all offer the same crappy free ridden services and use the same bogus anti-client reporting systems. And all the major ones charge other people to cash checks you write them at the counter.
The IE only issue sounds like about as big a difference as you'll find between banks.
If you had really done this you'd know DVDShrink hasn't been able to rip 99.9% of movies for years.
"you'll find a lot more regular joes and janes picking up this stuff on DVD from blackmarket dealers around the world"
Yeah, because you just see those all over the place. Seriously, I've seen one guy selling bootleg dvd's and music outside a store in Miami, once, in my life. I've never seen the same for software.
That is in Miami (along with any other of the populous areas on either FL coast), Chicago, St. Louis, Portland, Albuquerque, Reno, Vegas, I didn't spend much time there but that includes LA as well. I haven't seen street vendors of any kind (except maybe a hot dog cart or the like) outside those larger metro areas. Mostly "street vendors" amounts to bums with gold chains and brand new designer sneakers outside the bus/train/plane stations.
P.S. If you are using that many macros in a spreadsheet you are probably using the wrong tool for the job.
Coding macros in OOBasic is cake. Doing the same thing in VB is a mind bending exercise in traversing API documentation and finding the right interfaces to do what you want.
Seriously, that is called I know API x and this app is hard because it uses API y.
If you can't give up something you have learned and learn something new then computers just aren't for you.
If it doesn't work straight off or with a simple well documented fix I don't bother. I look for another solution. Usually the best solution is to run a native app.
They lied there is a third party DX 10 on XP installation. No real modifications were needed except to remove checks in the installation that deliberately block the install and execution.
There is nothing there that couldn't have been done in XP SP4 and almost all of that is something that was intentionally made deficient to increase sales of the new product. For example, there is a hack to install the new direct x versions on XP because there is no technical reason they can't run with full features.
"Windows 7 (and Vista?)"
If you are going to pretend those are different OS then I'm not sure we can even have a conversation.
That's an interesting site. Is there anyone else isn't buying that bribes have decreased by 2/3rds from 1998?
http://www.opensecrets.org/lobby/index.php
Looks like they are getting better at keeping the numbers off opensecrets.org.
True enough, but that is ignoring the millions of years of stored up solar energy in the form of other plants and animals. Plus one can assume the machines of the future have a nearly 100% efficient system and reuse their own waste heat.
You estimates of the amount of meat it takes, are they for a motionless human in a vegetative state or a real human that moves, grow muscles, etc?
The humans get their energy from the nutrient filled goo. DUH. Where do they get the nutrients for the goo you ask? From the dead humans! DUH.
Obviously it's a depleting system with fewer and fewer humans to be gotten each time around. But one can also assume that when the sky was blacked out there was vegetation and vegetable and animal organics. The machines could have found a way to convert that into sugars (along with the other dead humans of course) and nutrients to feed the humans.
There is quite a bit of organic energy already here.
Perk? Maybe not, but caffeine improves focus, cognition, and memory recall. At least that is what these studies show, and most of them account for withdraw.
http://cat.inist.fr/?aModele=afficheN&cpsidt=21812869
http://www.springerlink.com/content/y414x83288221635/
http://www.stormingmedia.us/28/2891/A289133.html
http://www.springerlink.com/content/yj8v0h54w05x222q/
http://arno.unimaas.nl/show.cgi?fid=7943
http://heldref.metapress.com/app/home/contribution.asp?referrer=parent&backto=issue,6,9;journal,31,55;linkingpublicationresults,1:119922,1
http://www.springerlink.com/content/a7k04226627g6326/
My other comments aside. It doesn't matter what the term originally meant. TODAY the term open source universally and without exception refers to using an OSI approved license.
Using it in any other way TODAY is an attempt at fraud regardless of what anyone might think the term meant historically.
Once upon a time a faggot was a bundle of sticks. Today it is a term to refer to a homosexual (with derogatory overtones). The only time you'd ever hear it refer to sticks/wood is as part of a comic relief act.
Open doesn't imply free. Simply being able to redistribute doesn't mean the software is free. "Free" in the free software sense means FSF approved license. "Open source" means OSI approved license.
Simply providing source code with no additional rights is neither since it wouldn't meet the requirements.
"open source" complies with the OSI requirements, simply making source available to someone does not meet the requirements. "free" means it complies with the FSF free software philosophy, again, simply allowing redistribution isn't enough.
"You've mixed up "open" and "free". Different terms meaning different things."
Not at all. You are just mistaken on what those terms mean in this context.
And? That wouldn't prevent you from downloading the GPL'd source from the linksys support page and distributing it to others who hadn't bought linksys routers.
I wouldn't disagree. Caldera used the term correctly, to refer to Linux and Free Software. As far as I know the term was originally synonymous with free software and redefined and formalized with OSI standards. This was in response to businesses that simply provided source access in some form abusing the term.
But free software is the original open source so redistribution is still implicit. There was nothing in what you quoted to indicate otherwise.
Open source is OSI. FSF free software is a different standard with different requirements.
You sound like a replay to the days of Microsoft trying to pawn their license as "open source". A battle they lost and ultimately caved to pressure and renamed to "shared source."
"It's nice, unambiguous, is an existing term and doesn't confuse half the software world which is still filled with people like me who recall Open Source meaning only that the source code is available."
Misremembering. Unfortunately, the world is indeed still filled with confused people who authoritatively claim inaccurate information. Did you know humans only use 10% of their brain?
No free software is something else altogether. Open source software does not just mean the source is "open", open source software is licensed under an OSI approved open source license and there are requirements.
http://opensource.org/docs/osd
If it doesn't meet those requirements it isn't open source and the source while it may be available ISN'T actually open.
"Essentially, only avoiding the specific case of people pawning off my direct unmodified works individually. Which is the only thing I objected to in the first place."
This wasn't a thread about what you objected to. This was a thread about forking the enterprise product once a paid customer got the source. You claimed a license could have been used that prevented that and still be open source. That is false. No license that is OSI FSF approved could prevent forking.
Simply removing the trademarked branding from the project would constitute a derivative.