Yeah right! An organization tasked with preventing desease around the world refuses to work with Taiwan to stem SARs and other flu-like diseases because of POLITICAL considerations.
Screw the UN. They would rather have me die of the bird flu than upset the pathetic political whims of the Chinese government.
Yeah right! An organization tasked with preventing desease around the world refuses to work with Taiwan to stem SARs and other flu-like diseases because of POLITICAL considerations.
Screw the UN. They would rather have me die of the bird flu than upset the pathetic political whims of the Chinese government.
If you look up the address on Yahoo Maps you can get a scale which indicates the property is only 1500 += 500 feet from a decent sized lake.
If the property has a lakefront component then that might just make for a pretty nice hotel.
Heck, I might be tempted to bid against the guy trying to put up the hotel and put up a bunch of houses 10 feet apart from each other and a 100 foot of lake access each. That would certainly up the tax rolls in Weare as well.
Can hear it now. Channel 11 has the whiny kid positioned about five feet ahead of me to the left and channel 8 has the mumbling of the jerks who refuse to stop talking to my direct rear.
Perhaps we can get some 13.1 sensurround where a Dolby foot in tune with nothing constantly kicks the back of your recliner as well.
Time for a constitutional admendment to stop this blatent abuse of the right's of the citizens.
Personally I don't like it that someone has to give up their home for a bridge or something beneficial to the public as a whole, but I can live with it.
But, when somebody with a large enough wallet and the right "connections" can come along and take my property for a strip mall, now that's a totally different matter.
That's gotta be stopped.
Just think of all the abuses this can bring up.
And for those who think it's just physical property you better think again. The law makes is color-blind when it comes to stuff like this.
It's a very slippery slope that could easily lead to the acquisition of intellectual property without the owners consent.
Just think of all those GPLed projects out there that the CIA or FBI would be willing to take and hand over to Microsoft.
Or, in a different light, all those GPLed properties that the RIAA would like to see disappear. A few greenbacks carefully placed into the right legislators hands could easily make this type of scenario happen.
The whole thing stinks to high heavens and I really believe that as government entities ramp up their abuse of their newly minted right of seizure that the citizenary are going to revolt.
> if your parents had decided to abort, or if a doctor coerced them into it, then it would be entirely their responsibility and not the fault of any test
Then by that same argument you would hold that the summary judgement/test (took one look at me walking and concluded I had a learning disability) the administrators performed at my pre-school was sufficient and that sort of test is OK.
The test had no bias? The test they used was a tool, of course.
Sure the people were pre-disposed, but they used a faulty test and wasted a lot of my time. Who knows where I could have gone if I hadn't been forced to spend six months of my time in an environment that was less than challenging to me.
Those administrators had a test, they used it. They came to the wrong conclusion. They held me back in some context.
Now take the same line of argument back to pre-natal testing. Yes, it would be my parent's responsibility. But, if given faulty and incomplete information that's hardly fair.
And that's exactly what happened to me. I was judged using a test which proved faulty.
And if the test is faulty then why is not the responsibility of society that such tests are allowed without any further corraborative evidence?
Even if given PERFECT information from a "test" who makes you god and let's you, my parent's, an administrator, or anybody for that matter, choose my well-being?
Do you have a wart? A mole? How about a pimple? Perhaps a birthmark? What if a test was proposed that those identified those with a birthmark? And that those people are defective. Is that fair?
A lot of people died in WWII for simply being Jewish? Why don't we simply use that test as a factor as to whether a woman is allowed to give birth?
Using a test as a crutch to excuse immoral behavior is as about as low as one can stoop.
> I expent 4 yeaar olds to ask that, it's healthy for them
I expect it also, and if they are given good guidance then it is a great learning experience for them.
> I am curious about how the parents respond.
Quite frankly I've been very impressed with the responses, everyone has been very nice.
> I never do for fear of insulting them. how would you respond if my son asked that question, and I introduced us to tlak to you for a few minutes?
Personally I would be honored if someone asked.
But, others might not be so inclined, they could be insulted. So I would probably refrain from being too forward.
As I implied, I often hear the little voices asking the question(s), it might be better if you take a different tact and maybe strike up a conversation with the person with the disability on a totally different subject. Let your child see you having a normal conversation with someone who is probably just an everyday joe.
That sort of thing actually happened to me as a child at the barbershop. I had noticed a gentleman whose eye seemed to not be quite right.
My dad started chit-chatting with him about the weather, etc. and the gentleman took the time to pull his glass eye out and show it to me.
I was probably about four and it really helped me understand that even though the glass-eyed gentleman was different in a sense he really wasn't different, he joked about his predicament, etc. with me, and made me feel confortable.
On a side note, I do accept graciously people holding doors for me, carrying heavy loads, etc. To me I'd love to be physically capable of carrying heavy stuff, but it's kinda pointless to struggle with it when there are able bodied people nearby who are willing to do it.
And when the time comes when heavy geek lifting (i.e. can you help me remove a virus from my PC...) is required then I try to do my best....
Am a decently successful human being, I run my own business, have held numerous significant jobs, have an advanced college degree.
But, I was born with a small level of Cerebral Palsy.
Just enough to make me limp and trip occasionally.
And other than constantly overhearing 4 year olds asking their parents why does that man walk that way in public I am just as "normal" as the next guy. Ok, normal might be too nice:-) But I'm trying.
When I entered pre-school I was automatically placed in the "special education" (that's what it was called then) class. Not one question was asked of my parents as to my cognitive abilities, etc. My Dad was livid to say the least.
But, what if I had been diagnosed in the womb with my CP would I even exist? Would a doctor have "convinced" my parents to abort?
The kind of testing described should be outlawed as far as I'm concerned.
We have already seen what happened in China, I believe it was, or was it India, when people started getting ultrasounds to determine if they were having a girl or a boy, then aborting the girl fetuses.
Dude, you're so unintelligable that I'm not sure I should even bother replying to you.
First you say:
> The government did not "invent" the internet as we know it.
Then you say:
> The network that makes up the Internet was originally designed for military communication redundancy
Well, who do you think that set of people who came up with this military communication redundancy was?
I'm sure it was AT&T, or some other similar ilk, because they cared so much about the military that they just did it out of the kindness of their hearts.
Or perhaps it was some geek in his basement, that's it, it was probably Hewlett and Packard in their garage.
Take a moment and study history a little. Search for Arpanet and learn what the government brought to you.
> The Internet is a medium of communication for individuals and groups, organizations, and companies, people and assemblies of all kinds
So, where is government in your list? BTW, if it were not for government inventing the internet you would be using compuserve or some other equally distasteful genre to be communicating your thoughts.
> As a medium of communication, putting ownership and control of access to it in the hands of government is a very very bad idea
Huh? If private business wants to put a product out there let them use a different channel. Duh, it ain't that difficult.
> Spoofing the air traffic control system in some fantastically improbably way might cause a few mid air collisions before the planes were grounded.
"Fantastically improbable" is the key phase there.
The ATC system, at least in the US, is comprised of some pretty old and pretty obscure equipment.
Not only would you have to take out the terminal area radars but you would also need to get the radio systems of both the pilots and the controllers. And don't forget that commercial airliners have radar and onboard aircraft avoidance systems of their own.
Add to that a regional result could probably only ever be achieved since it's quite easy for pilots to fly by looking out their window for problems.
In other words, the massive nationwide outtage could only occur on the improbable day where everywhere in the US has bad weather.
As much as people would like to think ATC is automated, when it is looked at in even a cursory fashion you quickly realize that the whole system is a lot closer to the "Airport" disaster movies (kinda scary huh?) than a perfectly choreagraphed system.
If the Chinese government honestly thinks it can make this new legislation stick then more power to them.
Anybody with an ounce of sound economic theory understanding will see how fruitless that sort of protectionism is.
What it really does is to set up even more opportunities for backroom deals which benefit unscrupulous individuals to the detriment of their society as a whole.
And isn't that the exact opposite of their notion of "ideal society"?
If I were the IT Director somewhere and I didn't even know the basics of what is arguably the most powerful networked operating system available today I would be ashamed to say it.
Get a job in another field. The people you support will be greatly appreciative.
Given the incomplete information provided, your points are fairly well taken, but answer this one for me.
If the LGPL requires what you say:
"If a commercial program linking to LGPL library by using header files forbids modification of the program in their EULA, then they are not living up to their LGPL obligations"
then just exactly what is the point of the LGPL versus the GPL? It seems the essence of your argument points to the two licenses being effectively the same animal.
And just for reference, the original poster picked and choosed the portions of the LGPL she wanted to quote.
To me the first line of section 5 contradicts the argument the parent poster wanted to make. It was very convenient that she left it out since leaving it out helped make her argument.
The entire section five should be taken as a whole thought, not just those portions that suit the purposes of the argument from a particular side.
Therefore, more, appropriately she should have quoted the entire text of section 5 which states:
5. A program that contains no derivative of any portion of the Library, but is designed to work with the Library by being compiled or linked with it, is called a "work that uses the Library". Such a work, in isolation, is not a derivative work of the Library, and therefore falls outside the scope of this License.
However, linking a "work that uses the Library" with the Library creates an executable that is a derivative of the Library (because it contains portions of the Library), rather than a "work that uses the library". The executable is therefore covered by this License. Section 6 states terms for distribution of such executables.
When a "work that uses the Library" uses material from a header file that is part of the Library, the object code for the work may be a derivative work of the Library even though the source code is not. Whether this is true is especially significant if the work can be linked without the Library, or if the work is itself a library. The threshold for this to be true is not precisely defined by law.
If such an object file uses only numerical parameters, data structure layouts and accessors, and small macros and small inline functions (ten lines or less in length), then the use of the object file is unrestricted, regardless of whether it is legally a derivative work. (Executables containing this object code plus portions of the Library will still fall under Section 6.)
Otherwise, if the work is a derivative of the Library, you may distribute the object code for the work under the terms of Section 6. Any executables containing that work also fall under Section 6, whether or not they are linked directly with the Library itself.
Think I'm correct on this one, and the reference sited in answers.com is wrong, somebody please feel free to slam me back down to earth...
But jerry-rig originated in WWII when British soldiers started noticing how the Germans were using any means possible to keep their equipment in working order.
The British referred to the Germans as Jerries and thus when the Germans rigged something up to work the term jerry-rigged was born.
I believe in some circles it is considered somewhat racist.
Slashdot Mirror
Sounds,
Like the Russian Mob wanted a piece of his spam.
Tasty!
The World Health Organization?
Yeah right! An organization tasked with preventing desease around the world refuses to work with Taiwan to stem SARs and other flu-like diseases because of POLITICAL considerations.
Screw the UN. They would rather have me die of the bird flu than upset the pathetic political whims of the Chinese government.
The World Health Organization?
Yeah right! An organization tasked with preventing desease around the world refuses to work with Taiwan to stem SARs and other flu-like diseases because of POLITICAL considerations.
Screw the UN. They would rather have me die of the bird flu than upset the pathetic political whims of the Chinese government.
Tough call,
On one hand I totally agree with you.
But on the other hand as superflous as a development as possible is what I feel is justifiable.
Does that mean I need to lower my standards and put up a trailor court?
You know,
If you look up the address on Yahoo Maps you can get a scale which indicates the property is only 1500 += 500 feet from a decent sized lake.
If the property has a lakefront component then that might just make for a pretty nice hotel.
Heck, I might be tempted to bid against the guy trying to put up the hotel and put up a bunch of houses 10 feet apart from each other and a 100 foot of lake access each. That would certainly up the tax rolls in Weare as well.
I,
Can hear it now. Channel 11 has the whiny kid positioned about five feet ahead of me to the left and channel 8 has the mumbling of the jerks who refuse to stop talking to my direct rear.
Perhaps we can get some 13.1 sensurround where a Dolby foot in tune with nothing constantly kicks the back of your recliner as well.
See here:
1
http://www.aemj.org/cgi/content/abstract/7/12/134
It's,
Time for a constitutional admendment to stop this blatent abuse of the right's of the citizens.
Personally I don't like it that someone has to give up their home for a bridge or something beneficial to the public as a whole, but I can live with it.
But, when somebody with a large enough wallet and the right "connections" can come along and take my property for a strip mall, now that's a totally different matter.
That's gotta be stopped.
Just think of all the abuses this can bring up.
And for those who think it's just physical property you better think again. The law makes is color-blind when it comes to stuff like this.
It's a very slippery slope that could easily lead to the acquisition of intellectual property without the owners consent.
Just think of all those GPLed projects out there that the CIA or FBI would be willing to take and hand over to Microsoft.
Or, in a different light, all those GPLed properties that the RIAA would like to see disappear. A few greenbacks carefully placed into the right legislators hands could easily make this type of scenario happen.
The whole thing stinks to high heavens and I really believe that as government entities ramp up their abuse of their newly minted right of seizure that the citizenary are going to revolt.
Last time I was physically down there I think I saw a few.
http://www.weirdstuff.com/
Their website seems to be down at the moment but check back later...
> How many times have you seen people on here touting manpower and availability of resources as the solution to these problems.
I
Totally agree. If I had moderation points I would send them positively your way.
Slashdot is made up of nothing more than a bunch of yes-men slapping congratulations on each other's backs.
Need I say more
> if your parents had decided to abort, or if a doctor coerced them into it, then it would be entirely their responsibility and not the fault of any test
Then by that same argument you would hold that the summary judgement/test (took one look at me walking and concluded I had a learning disability) the administrators performed at my pre-school was sufficient and that sort of test is OK.
The test had no bias? The test they used was a tool, of course.
Sure the people were pre-disposed, but they used a faulty test and wasted a lot of my time. Who knows where I could have gone if I hadn't been forced to spend six months of my time in an environment that was less than challenging to me.
Those administrators had a test, they used it. They came to the wrong conclusion. They held me back in some context.
Now take the same line of argument back to pre-natal testing. Yes, it would be my parent's responsibility. But, if given faulty and incomplete information that's hardly fair.
And that's exactly what happened to me. I was judged using a test which proved faulty.
And if the test is faulty then why is not the responsibility of society that such tests are allowed without any further corraborative evidence?
Even if given PERFECT information from a "test" who makes you god and let's you, my parent's, an administrator, or anybody for that matter, choose my well-being?
Do you have a wart? A mole? How about a pimple? Perhaps a birthmark? What if a test was proposed that those identified those with a birthmark? And that those people are defective. Is that fair?
A lot of people died in WWII for simply being Jewish? Why don't we simply use that test as a factor as to whether a woman is allowed to give birth?
Using a test as a crutch to excuse immoral behavior is as about as low as one can stoop.
It is you who is the defective one. You are frustrating and problematic. You should have been aborted prior to birth.
> I expent 4 yeaar olds to ask that, it's healthy for them
I expect it also, and if they are given good guidance then it is a great learning experience for them.
> I am curious about how the parents respond.
Quite frankly I've been very impressed with the responses, everyone has been very nice.
> I never do for fear of insulting them.
how would you respond if my son asked that question, and I introduced us to tlak to you for a few minutes?
Personally I would be honored if someone asked.
But, others might not be so inclined, they could be insulted. So I would probably refrain from being too forward.
As I implied, I often hear the little voices asking the question(s), it might be better if you take a different tact and maybe strike up a conversation with the person with the disability on a totally different subject. Let your child see you having a normal conversation with someone who is probably just an everyday joe.
That sort of thing actually happened to me as a child at the barbershop. I had noticed a gentleman whose eye seemed to not be quite right.
My dad started chit-chatting with him about the weather, etc. and the gentleman took the time to pull his glass eye out and show it to me.
I was probably about four and it really helped me understand that even though the glass-eyed gentleman was different in a sense he really wasn't different, he joked about his predicament, etc. with me, and made me feel confortable.
On a side note, I do accept graciously people holding doors for me, carrying heavy loads, etc. To me I'd love to be physically capable of carrying heavy stuff, but it's kinda pointless to struggle with it when there are able bodied people nearby who are willing to do it.
And when the time comes when heavy geek lifting (i.e. can you help me remove a virus from my PC...) is required then I try to do my best....
I,
Am a decently successful human being, I run my own business, have held numerous significant jobs, have an advanced college degree.
But, I was born with a small level of Cerebral Palsy.
Just enough to make me limp and trip occasionally.
And other than constantly overhearing 4 year olds asking their parents why does that man walk that way in public I am just as "normal" as the next guy. Ok, normal might be too nice:-) But I'm trying.
When I entered pre-school I was automatically placed in the "special education" (that's what it was called then) class. Not one question was asked of my parents as to my cognitive abilities, etc. My Dad was livid to say the least.
But, what if I had been diagnosed in the womb with my CP would I even exist? Would a doctor have "convinced" my parents to abort?
The kind of testing described should be outlawed as far as I'm concerned.
We have already seen what happened in China, I believe it was, or was it India, when people started getting ultrasounds to determine if they were having a girl or a boy, then aborting the girl fetuses.
It's just a place society shouldn't go, at all.
Dude, you're so unintelligable that I'm not sure I should even bother replying to you.
First you say:
> The government did not "invent" the internet as we know it.
Then you say:
> The network that makes up the Internet was originally designed for military communication redundancy
Well, who do you think that set of people who came up with this military communication redundancy was?
I'm sure it was AT&T, or some other similar ilk, because they cared so much about the military that they just did it out of the kindness of their hearts.
Or perhaps it was some geek in his basement, that's it, it was probably Hewlett and Packard in their garage.
Take a moment and study history a little. Search for Arpanet and learn what the government brought to you.
> The Internet is a medium of communication for individuals and groups, organizations, and companies, people and assemblies of all kinds
So, where is government in your list? BTW, if it were not for government inventing the internet you would be using compuserve or some other equally distasteful genre to be communicating your thoughts.
> As a medium of communication, putting ownership and control of access to it in the hands of government is a very very bad idea
Huh? If private business wants to put a product out there let them use a different channel. Duh, it ain't that difficult.
> Spoofing the air traffic control system in some fantastically improbably way might cause a few mid air collisions before the planes were grounded.
"Fantastically improbable" is the key phase there.
The ATC system, at least in the US, is comprised of some pretty old and pretty obscure equipment.
Not only would you have to take out the terminal area radars but you would also need to get the radio systems of both the pilots and the controllers. And don't forget that commercial airliners have radar and onboard aircraft avoidance systems of their own.
Add to that a regional result could probably only ever be achieved since it's quite easy for pilots to fly by looking out their window for problems.
In other words, the massive nationwide outtage could only occur on the improbable day where everywhere in the US has bad weather.
As much as people would like to think ATC is automated, when it is looked at in even a cursory fashion you quickly realize that the whole system is a lot closer to the "Airport" disaster movies (kinda scary huh?) than a perfectly choreagraphed system.
People,
Have been crying for the need to replace relational databases since the early nineties at least.
We can all see where that got them.
If the Chinese government honestly thinks it can make this new legislation stick then more power to them.
Anybody with an ounce of sound economic theory understanding will see how fruitless that sort of protectionism is.
What it really does is to set up even more opportunities for backroom deals which benefit unscrupulous individuals to the detriment of their society as a whole.
And isn't that the exact opposite of their notion of "ideal society"?
And still nothing on
Personally,
If I were the IT Director somewhere and I didn't even know the basics of what is arguably the most powerful networked operating system available today I would be ashamed to say it.
Get a job in another field. The people you support will be greatly appreciative.
Ok,
Given the incomplete information provided, your points are fairly well taken, but answer this one for me.
If the LGPL requires what you say:
"If a commercial program linking to LGPL library by using header files forbids modification of the program in their EULA, then they are not living up to their LGPL obligations"
then just exactly what is the point of the LGPL versus the GPL? It seems the essence of your argument points to the two licenses being effectively the same animal.
And just for reference, the original poster picked and choosed the portions of the LGPL she wanted to quote.
To me the first line of section 5 contradicts the argument the parent poster wanted to make. It was very convenient that she left it out since leaving it out helped make her argument.
The entire section five should be taken as a whole thought, not just those portions that suit the purposes of the argument from a particular side.
Therefore, more, appropriately she should have quoted the entire text of section 5 which states:
5. A program that contains no derivative of any portion of the Library, but is designed to work with the Library by being compiled or linked with it, is called a "work that uses the Library". Such a work, in isolation, is not a derivative work of the Library, and therefore falls outside the scope of this License.
However, linking a "work that uses the Library" with the Library creates an executable that is a derivative of the Library (because it contains portions of the Library), rather than a "work that uses the library". The executable is therefore covered by this License. Section 6 states terms for distribution of such executables.
When a "work that uses the Library" uses material from a header file that is part of the Library, the object code for the work may be a derivative work of the Library even though the source code is not. Whether this is true is especially significant if the work can be linked without the Library, or if the work is itself a library. The threshold for this to be true is not precisely defined by law.
If such an object file uses only numerical parameters, data structure layouts and accessors, and small macros and small inline functions (ten lines or less in length), then the use of the object file is unrestricted, regardless of whether it is legally a derivative work. (Executables containing this object code plus portions of the Library will still fall under Section 6.)
Otherwise, if the work is a derivative of the Library, you may distribute the object code for the work under the terms of Section 6. Any executables containing that work also fall under Section 6, whether or not they are linked directly with the Library itself.
I,
Think I'm correct on this one, and the reference sited in answers.com is wrong, somebody please feel free to slam me back down to earth...
But jerry-rig originated in WWII when British soldiers started noticing how the Germans were using any means possible to keep their equipment in working order.
The British referred to the Germans as Jerries and thus when the Germans rigged something up to work the term jerry-rigged was born.
I believe in some circles it is considered somewhat racist.
Have a nice day...
Sweet,
Never knew it was there. But, I've already informed my more geeky friends and I'll be trying it very soon.
Thanks!