It's because they think they need a nutjob in order to get the Republican "base" out to vote, when what they really need is a moderate to win over the undecided voters (who are the real deciding factor).
Stations have about a few million different ways of publishing the data - it's something that companies like TV Guide and Tribune end up having to fix up. You won't believe how the TV guide data comes in - sometimes it's a handwritten sheet with the upcoming shows. Maybe it's a printed grid they fax over daily. some of them have it electronically, of course in various formats (spreadsheets, word doc, XML, etc). Oh, and the typos, the typos...
Couldn't the FCC just force the stations to publish the data in a particular format? Maybe they should make a new standard: ATSC 1.1, which would be ATSC + a TV guide XML data stream.
I pre-ordered the Nexus 7, and even that hasn't been long enough ago for me not to be pissed about this. On the bright side, at least the only apparent difference is the availability of 32GB of Flash and a cellular modem, neither of which I care about. I wish my device weren't just de-valued by $50 though.
What I'm really glad of, though, is that I didn't jump the gun on replacing my old Samsung Intercept with a Galaxy Nexus, and can get that Nexus 4 instead.
Who are we to impose such misery, and why is the EU doing this? It's a shame, and possibily an act of war.
So it's an act of war to refuse to trade? That's a load of BS. How is it the US' or EU's fault that Iran can't be bothered to grow enough food to feed itself?
I'm not the writer of the original post. Anyway, does a pierced ear not heal? If it does, then how could one say that the earring is "inside" the skin?
Transdermal describes objects that protrude from the inside of the body to the outside through the skin, like horns.
In contrast, something like an ear piercing where the skin forms a torus around the object and the object is not actually partially inside the body is something else. Maybe the appropriate prefix is whichever one means "adjacent to."
So a Ford Fiesta has luxury car features... but it's still "crappy" and you have to spend $23,000 to get something "OK?" With an adjustment in perspective, it could just as well be argued that the Fiesta is no longer crappy!
For instance, I have a 1996 Mazda B4000 pickup that gets horrible mileage (around 17mpg). It has around 210,000 miles on it. However, other than fuel, regular maintenance and insurance, there are no other regular payments. Granted, one day, it will need a major repair that will be cost prohibitive and it will get replaced. But, to replace it now, for the sake of better mileage is crazy. Currently, I user about 1,000 gallons of fuel, say at $4/gal or $4,000/yr. Say I could get 25.5 mpg (a 50% increase in fuel economy). I would only need 667 gallons of fuel or $2,668/yr at $4/gal. I would "save" $1,332. But then again, I would have to pay $3,600/yr in car payments, so I would actually pay out $2,268/yr more than keeping my existing vehicle (at least for the first five years). And that is assuming I could get a replacement truck that would actually average 25.5mpg in real life.
A 1996 Mazda B2300 gets almost 25mpg, and replacing your current truck for one would be more or less an even swap. (It may not be worth it because of the added maintenance unknowns, though.)
There really should be a better solution. I think super-slippery seat material and underpants might solve it. But I haven't found anything suitable yet.
If it was legal to attach an electric motor to a bike that could sustain 35MPH or so, and could still use bike lanes, sidewalks, etc., a ton of people would prefer them.
What do you mean, "still use... sidewalks?" Non-motorized bikes are illegal to use on the goddamn sidewalk too (and the majority of cycling deaths happen to cyclists too stupid to realize that)!
I'd like to see more efficient travel, and where it's available I'll use it, but choosing not to travel is right up there for me with choosing not to use the internet. If you want to argue for more efficient travel, I'm interested. If you want to argue for a lack of travel, I'm not hearing you, and maybe you should leave the conversation to those who want to travel. I mean, if nobody traveled, we wouldn't need roads, just some sort of rail that could handle our freight. Maybe you need a job where you live upstairs from your desk.
There's travel and then there's travel. A road trip to see the scenery has value, but sitting in a traffic jam because your job is located inconveniently is worthless.
Sure about that 25 minute figure? I figure I'm doing well if from door to door I can shower and change clothes in 10 minutes so you're somehow claiming it takes 15 minutes in car or on bike....
If I bike to work it takes me 20 minutes + the time to shower at work. If I drive a car to work it takes me 10 minutes + the time to shower at home.
In other words, it's not reasonable to include showering time in the bike commute because the time it takes to shower doesn't change, only the location.
Find a gym or whatever that you want to go to. I don't mind exercise if I like the place, the people, and the activity. Life's too short to do stuff you don't like because someone else says you should from a hair shirt perspective.
Why spend money on a gym membership when exercising concurrently with your commute is free?
And derivative works can be made, derivative != proprietary.
True, but in practical terms, the sets overlap nearly 100%.
Did you even RTFA? You do realise that the GPL is being used to prevent users from using a proprietary module don't you? If you're going to suggest that every end user manually change EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL to EXPORT_SYMBOL and recompile their kernel just to avoid this restriction then you're way out of touch.
But they still could. Freedom != convenience.
So it seems like we're each making two kinds of arguments here: arguments of "possibility" and arguments of "probability." We can't each have our cake and eat it too, so we'll have to agree to compare one or the other. Either:
it's possible for third-party developers to use BSD code while still contributing back to the community and it's possible for Linux users to simply change EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL to EXPORT_SYMBOL if they want the proprietary drivers, or
It's improbable that Linux users would bother to edit the kernel source and it's improbable that any third-party developers would contribute back to BSD-licensed code.
So Linux being BSD-licensed either wouldn't help the users because they can do what they want anyway, or it would hurt the users because by the time they get it they end up with a "proprietary-ized" version (like TiVo, but even worse). Either way, using the GPL is better. QED.
No, derived works don't take anything away, that's analogous to the argument that 'piracy is theft', derivative works don't change the original, they create new copies.
If all BSD software were as complete as TeX, then that argument would be relevant. But given that the vast majority of BSD software (just like software in general) is incomplete, it requires derivative works to be made to be useful.
I also noticed you've completely avoided the fact that the GPL is being used to restrict freedom of the user, if the code was under a permissive the user wouldn't be restricted in the software they run, but thanks to the GPL, they are!
Users are not subject to the GPL, since they don't make copies. They are free to combine whatever code they want, including linking (Hell, even copy-pasting) proprietary code directly to GPL code.
On many issues libertarians are much more liberal than Democrats will ever be. Gay marriage for example... Libertarians don't even think marriage should be something the government has anything to do with. Mary a goat for all they care. That's between you and your religion.
Let's not get too carried away now; I think most Libertarians would still care about all parties being capable of consent. So maybe group marriage would be OK, but marrying animals and children not so much.
Explain to me how - if i have BSD-licensed code - i am prevented from modifying it? If a proprietary derivative work is created it is not BSD-licensed [anymore]
And that's precisely the problem: it's all destroyed by the middlemen!
BSD code is like a river: the middlemen developers have siphoned it all off and shat in whatever dregs are left before it gets to the end user.
Slashdot Mirror
So, you missed the part where the (relatively) moderate candidate won the primary and then picked a hick-and-nutter running mate?
It's because they think they need a nutjob in order to get the Republican "base" out to vote, when what they really need is a moderate to win over the undecided voters (who are the real deciding factor).
To be fair, the standard is fucking Micro-USB and there's no goddamn reason why Apple couldn't have picked it instead!
Couldn't the FCC just force the stations to publish the data in a particular format? Maybe they should make a new standard: ATSC 1.1, which would be ATSC + a TV guide XML data stream.
I pre-ordered the Nexus 7, and even that hasn't been long enough ago for me not to be pissed about this. On the bright side, at least the only apparent difference is the availability of 32GB of Flash and a cellular modem, neither of which I care about. I wish my device weren't just de-valued by $50 though.
What I'm really glad of, though, is that I didn't jump the gun on replacing my old Samsung Intercept with a Galaxy Nexus, and can get that Nexus 4 instead.
You win some, you lose some, I guess.
You know what should drive you crazy? Omitting the damn verb (e.g. "...need [to be] closed") from your sentences!!!
Perhaps the real issue is that "easy A" classes exist. Any field can be made challenging if the students are required to go into enough depth.
So it's an act of war to refuse to trade? That's a load of BS. How is it the US' or EU's fault that Iran can't be bothered to grow enough food to feed itself?
I'm not the writer of the original post. Anyway, does a pierced ear not heal? If it does, then how could one say that the earring is "inside" the skin?
Transdermal describes objects that protrude from the inside of the body to the outside through the skin, like horns.
In contrast, something like an ear piercing where the skin forms a torus around the object and the object is not actually partially inside the body is something else. Maybe the appropriate prefix is whichever one means "adjacent to."
So a Ford Fiesta has luxury car features... but it's still "crappy" and you have to spend $23,000 to get something "OK?" With an adjustment in perspective, it could just as well be argued that the Fiesta is no longer crappy!
A 1996 Mazda B2300 gets almost 25mpg, and replacing your current truck for one would be more or less an even swap. (It may not be worth it because of the added maintenance unknowns, though.)
Doing stupid things like renting-to-own furniture is why people are living paycheck-to-paycheck in the first place!
Facebook breaks my terms of service too, so we're even!
Spandex underpants?
What do you mean, "still use... sidewalks?" Non-motorized bikes are illegal to use on the goddamn sidewalk too (and the majority of cycling deaths happen to cyclists too stupid to realize that)!
There's travel and then there's travel. A road trip to see the scenery has value, but sitting in a traffic jam because your job is located inconveniently is worthless.
By the way, consider this
If I bike to work it takes me 20 minutes + the time to shower at work. If I drive a car to work it takes me 10 minutes + the time to shower at home.
In other words, it's not reasonable to include showering time in the bike commute because the time it takes to shower doesn't change, only the location.
Why spend money on a gym membership when exercising concurrently with your commute is free?
True, but in practical terms, the sets overlap nearly 100%.
But they still could. Freedom != convenience.
So it seems like we're each making two kinds of arguments here: arguments of "possibility" and arguments of "probability." We can't each have our cake and eat it too, so we'll have to agree to compare one or the other. Either:
So Linux being BSD-licensed either wouldn't help the users because they can do what they want anyway, or it would hurt the users because by the time they get it they end up with a "proprietary-ized" version (like TiVo, but even worse). Either way, using the GPL is better. QED.
It must be a relatively recent development, then. At least as of Snow Leopard, it was all GNU.
The most popular BSD (by a wide margin), OS X, uses a GNU userland.
If all BSD software were as complete as TeX, then that argument would be relevant. But given that the vast majority of BSD software (just like software in general) is incomplete, it requires derivative works to be made to be useful.
Users are not subject to the GPL, since they don't make copies. They are free to combine whatever code they want, including linking (Hell, even copy-pasting) proprietary code directly to GPL code.
Let's not get too carried away now; I think most Libertarians would still care about all parties being capable of consent. So maybe group marriage would be OK, but marrying animals and children not so much.
Without Palin, McCain might have gotten a huge pile of moderate/independent votes (maybe even including mine).
And that's precisely the problem: it's all destroyed by the middlemen!
BSD code is like a river: the middlemen developers have siphoned it all off and shat in whatever dregs are left before it gets to the end user.