The user *has* to know that the Ok button is the default for that to work, for otherwise hed be playing at russian roulette. I do not know what the default is in the Ubuntu dialog (probably it is the Ok button too) but I am sure the dialog is keyboard-navigable just as the Windows one.
UIs in Ubuntu (in GNOME) are hardly perfect, but you should find something real to complain about...
Boo hoo. "Tough to enter the United States". "No longer a melting pot."
On the first issue, so what? We're still the freest country on the planet (at least of any consequential size). Ambient Sheep, you have no first and second amendment rights in the UK, right? The two most important freedoms devised by the people who revolvted against your government - freedom of speech and to bear arms to protect that freedom - are still, 200+ years later, NOT expressly rights in your country. If I was you, I'd not just visit the US, I'd move here. In fact, you can't even OWN a gun - a convenient thing for any government wishing to oppress - except a pea shooter in the countryside for plinking rabbits. James Bond, license to kill. Big deal. All our law enforcement has a license to kill. And, in the US, citizens can clearly exercise the right all liviing things have to self-protection. As Heinlein said, "An armed society is a polite society."
Monopoles in quantum field theory: proceedings of the Monopole Meeting...âZ
by N. S. Craigie, P. Goddard, W. Nahm, International Centre for Theoretical Physics, Istituto nazionale di fisica nucleare
Snippet view - 1982
Actualy, Dirac in his later years decided that the lack of evidence together with the effort spent on finding them was a good indication that monopoles do not exist. He was invited to a conference on the subject (one a year some round number of years after his paper on monopoles) and he declined to attent, explaining that he had stopped thinking the subject of interest for that precise reason. His response letter is included in the conference proceedings, and makes for an amusing read:P
'Free' is not a magic word that means something absolutely, there is no $DEITY-given dictionary which provides a canonical meaning for the word.
Whether I call it 'free', 'open', 'shared', 'blue' or 'pretty' is completely irrelevant: what is relevant is what users and developers are allowed to do with the code and under what conditions.
This silly bickering about what kind 'free' is freer was boring already decades ago...
And that the conditions of the GPL make it trivial for someone to accidentally infringe (compile some GPL'd software that's only available in source form, give a copy to your friend, forget to include an offer in writing to provide the source - oops, you've just infringed the GPL).
Can't you really see that this can happen in exactly the same way with *all* licenses?
No. Someone at Exxon will phone someone, and then the US govt will authorize another trillion dollar trip to liberate, hmm, Martians. Just like last time. Whent he liberating is, hmm, done (imagine the corresponding photo-op where the president comes down of a space ship!), only *then* will Exxon go.
It's also an example of why I think it's silly to focus only on whether a given system is "free"; better questions are, "is it the best right now, and by how much", "for how long will it probably stay the best", and "how hard (expensive) will it be to switch to something else later".
But that is simply shortsightedness.
Very few examples are there better than Linux itself to show that h'ow free a system is', and 'for how long it will probably stay the best' and other very important other aspects of software are very much intermingled.
The position which attempts to forget the political, legal and sociological support for a project and concentrate it on its technical aspect is simply going to fail, because it does not cater for the things that make a project successful and sustainable.
It really seems that you think that if you compile code with the GPL'ed gcc, for example, your code becomes GPL'ed itself... You are not *that* confused, are you?
Slashdot Mirror
Your assumptions were wrong. And this is a design flaw in ldd?
The user *has* to know that the Ok button is the default for that to work, for otherwise hed be playing at russian roulette. I do not know what the default is in the Ubuntu dialog (probably it is the Ok button too) but I am sure the dialog is keyboard-navigable just as the Windows one.
UIs in Ubuntu (in GNOME) are hardly perfect, but you should find something real to complain about...
You seem to think that PA and GStreamer are competing or something. You clearly do not have any idea of what at least one of them is...
Why would I not claim what I claimed? It is true.
All standards are born that way. Well... all good standards: those of the other kind usually are born in without having been implemented before.
Boo hoo. "Tough to enter the United States". "No longer a melting pot."
On the first issue, so what? We're still the freest country on the planet (at least of any consequential size). Ambient Sheep, you have no first and second amendment rights in the UK, right? The two most important freedoms devised by the people who revolvted against your government - freedom of speech and to bear arms to protect that freedom - are still, 200+ years later, NOT expressly rights in your country. If I was you, I'd not just visit the US, I'd move here. In fact, you can't even OWN a gun - a convenient thing for any government wishing to oppress - except a pea shooter in the countryside for plinking rabbits. James Bond, license to kill. Big deal. All our law enforcement has a license to kill. And, in the US, citizens can clearly exercise the right all liviing things have to self-protection. As Heinlein said, "An armed society is a polite society."
Please tell me this is satire...
But none of those products introduce even the possibility of vendor lock-in...
Monopoles in quantum field theory: proceedings of the Monopole Meeting ...âZ
by N. S. Craigie, P. Goddard, W. Nahm, International Centre for Theoretical Physics, Istituto nazionale di fisica nucleare
Snippet view - 1982
Actualy, Dirac in his later years decided that the lack of evidence together with the effort spent on finding them was a good indication that monopoles do not exist. He was invited to a conference on the subject (one a year some round number of years after his paper on monopoles) and he declined to attent, explaining that he had stopped thinking the subject of interest for that precise reason. His response letter is included in the conference proceedings, and makes for an amusing read :P
In what possible way is it tyrannical? Are you being forced by someone to use my code and therefore to accept my conditions?
'Free' is not a magic word that means something absolutely, there is no $DEITY-given dictionary which provides a canonical meaning for the word. Whether I call it 'free', 'open', 'shared', 'blue' or 'pretty' is completely irrelevant: what is relevant is what users and developers are allowed to do with the code and under what conditions.
This silly bickering about what kind 'free' is freer was boring already decades ago...
There is nothing wrong with you not using my code if you do not like my conditions, either...
It is sad to see into what your attempt at a reasoning degenerated :/
You simply cannot be saying that hiding words from kids does them any good, can you?
But that is 100% independent of XML. Programmers can ignore errors produced by *anything*.
All text has been available to GNOME accessibility apps for ages now... Why do you think it is hard?
And that the conditions of the GPL make it trivial for someone to accidentally infringe (compile some GPL'd software that's only available in source form, give a copy to your friend, forget to include an offer in writing to provide the source - oops, you've just infringed the GPL).
Can't you really see that this can happen in exactly the same way with *all* licenses?
Because no one, including you, sat down and did it before.
No. Someone at Exxon will phone someone, and then the US govt will authorize another trillion dollar trip to liberate, hmm, Martians. Just like last time. Whent he liberating is, hmm, done (imagine the corresponding photo-op where the president comes down of a space ship!), only *then* will Exxon go.
nvidia's linux drivers are not linked to any GPL code (as far as we know, that is!)
While that is wrong---you must be new here...---it is also irrelevant, as the proportion of people 'around here' is negligible...
You are trying to apply logic to patent and copyright law...
It's also an example of why I think it's silly to focus only on whether a given system is "free"; better questions are, "is it the best right now, and by how much", "for how long will it probably stay the best", and "how hard (expensive) will it be to switch to something else later".
But that is simply shortsightedness.
Very few examples are there better than Linux itself to show that h'ow free a system is', and 'for how long it will probably stay the best' and other very important other aspects of software are very much intermingled.
The position which attempts to forget the political, legal and sociological support for a project and concentrate it on its technical aspect is simply going to fail, because it does not cater for the things that make a project successful and sustainable.
A beginning programmer should stay away from threads. In fact, most programmers, beginning and old, should stay away from threads.
But that has very little to do with the GPL!
It really seems that you think that if you compile code with the GPL'ed gcc, for example, your code becomes GPL'ed itself... You are not *that* confused, are you?