Besides that, collecting evidence about crime is very, very definitely not my problem. Child Porn on some pervert's machine? Call the cops, get them to get an engineer out and -- more importantly -- a warrant for the drive. Despite 8 years of lawless Neo-Con rule, you still need a warrant for this kinda stuff. In theory.
By the time you see the evidence of child porn, the pervert already has a positive defense -- namely, that the porn was put there while the drive was in your possession. There's no way to prove that you didn't put it there yourself to frame him, and your word -- with you not being a P.I. or law enforcement officer -- isn't strong enough to override that doubt, so the evidence is inadmissible.
But my health insurer is able to make that judgement and also has a clear incentive to steer me away from doctors who are likely to place me in bodily danger.
You're kidding, right? What your health insurer has is a clear incentive to send you to the cheapest dumbass they can find, and then simply disbelieve you and deny your claim when you complain that he screwed up.
Disclaimer: IANAL. Do not take this advice without consulting one and confirming that it is correct, especially since you're talking about a company's actions.
The GPLv3 does not require that you help the user modify the code on the device; it only requires that you don't hinder him. In fact, you could burn GPLv3 code into ROM (which would, of course, be entirely unmodifiable) and be okay. It is only when you artificially disallow modification that would otherwise be technically possible by using DRM that you violate the license.
Of course, I'm sure it would be appreciated if you picked a board capable of modifying the code on the FPGA if a suitable driver existed, and released the information necessary for the community to write one. I don't think too many people would complain about you not spending the effort to write a Free driver yourself in that case.
Re:I've seen an effect
on
A Year of GPLv3
·
· Score: 3, Informative
Wow, two misconceptions packed into one sentence! Impressive!
If (and only if) it's Public Domain then you don't need a license. That's what Public Domain means!
In all cases, even including proprietary stuff, you already have the right to use it. It is only distributing copies of it (modified or unmodified) that you do not have the right to do. Without making a copy, copyright law never kicks in.
Re:Anyone see much of a difference?
on
A Year of GPLv3
·
· Score: 1
I see one big difference: the GPL is a distribution license, but the AGPL is a EULA.
Tell that to the OpenOffice.org people -- they seem to think the GPL is an EULA too (because they include it in the installer where an EULA usually goes and force you to click "I Agree" to install).
Re:I believe you mean freedom # -1
on
A Year of GPLv3
·
· Score: 4, Insightful
...it prevents you from creating hardware which will only run approved binaries and distributing approved free software binaries for it.
Not quite. You can even do that, if you also give the user the ability to "approve" binaries himself.
Re:I believe you mean freedom # -1
on
A Year of GPLv3
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
It restricts what hardware you may distribute the software on.
This is a lie.
The truth is that you can distribute GPL 3 code on any hardware you want, even hardware that refuses to run unsigned binaries, and including the fucking TiVo! All you have to do is give the user the key so that he can sign modified binaries himself and run them.
Through eBay's VeRO program we were accused several times of pedaling fakes even though we had the real thing. There was no opportunity for us to prove that we had authentic merchandise though we certainly could have done so were there any means to plead our case. Our auctions were summarily taken down and we were given strikes with no recourse of any kind.
So browsers other than IE support (to varying degrees) referencing SVG drawings using the <img> or <object> tags. But that doesn't go far enough, IMHO; since both SVG and XHTML are both XML, I'd like to be able to embed either within the other, e.g. by putting a SVG polygon or circle on a webpage (surrounded by HTML), with another field of HTML embedded inside it.
They are realizing they have two businesses- content delivery and connectivity.
Exactly, and that's what's wrong! If we simply forced content delivery and connectivity to always be performed by entirely separate, independent companies then we wouldn't have this problem.
If they hope that people will bring them home if they miss the enemy, then they're fucking stupid. How is anybody going to notice whether they're missing or not, let alone whether they're doing it on purpose? If they really want to go home, then they ought to just refuse to fire at all -- that'll get them home a lot faster!
The solution to this is blindingly obvious: run the farm equipment and other production machinery on ethanol* too! Obviously it reduces the net yield, but as long as it's positive it's okay (and if it weren't positive, nobody would consider doing it anyway).
Also, even E85 is 15% gasoline
And 85% is a lot! Besides, that's where my "gasoline synthesis" idea comes in.
I agree completely! Unfortunately, these types of technologies as well as the ethanol mentioned above are at least decades away.
I say we increase domestic energy production (drill for oil!) and use the revenues from that to fund the research required to speed these technologies along.
Or we could quit funding the Iraq war for a day or two (and yes, that's hyperbole, but you get my point).
...before the oil runs out...
The problem is not the oil running out, the problem is it becoming too hard to increase production. Even though there would still be quite a lot of oil left, the high cost would cause economic havoc. Considering the skyrocketing prices in the last year, I think this is happening as we speak.
(*Actually biodiesel, because existing equipment is diesel-based)
One-hundred and thirty-six nuclear plants. Sorry, but nuclear fission is not the energy source to synthesize gasoline.
Why not? That's only about 3 per state, you know -- seems reasonable to me! It's not as if nuclear power plants take up that much space. (Besides, you could always just build fewer, larger plants.)
Make that 20% efficiency (probably still very, very optimistic), and you're at 680 nuclear plants, just for gasoline, and just for the USA. Good luck.
And? So it'd maybe be a bit annoying to build. Compared to impoverishing ourselves to OPEC, killing ourselves with pollution/global warming/whatever, etc. isn't it worth it?
Slashdot Mirror
Obviously then, it's also gross foolishness to equate those who work on machines with those who work on people. Yet Engineers are licensed too. Hmm...
By the time you see the evidence of child porn, the pervert already has a positive defense -- namely, that the porn was put there while the drive was in your possession. There's no way to prove that you didn't put it there yourself to frame him, and your word -- with you not being a P.I. or law enforcement officer -- isn't strong enough to override that doubt, so the evidence is inadmissible.
You're kidding, right? What your health insurer has is a clear incentive to send you to the cheapest dumbass they can find, and then simply disbelieve you and deny your claim when you complain that he screwed up.
In what dumb-ass, backward jurisdictions do you not have the right to use stuff that you've legally obtained?
Hello to you too!
Specifically, what context am I missing?
But there is a technical one. And your post was, indeed, technically untrue.
Disclaimer: IANAL. Do not take this advice without consulting one and confirming that it is correct, especially since you're talking about a company's actions.
The GPLv3 does not require that you help the user modify the code on the device; it only requires that you don't hinder him. In fact, you could burn GPLv3 code into ROM (which would, of course, be entirely unmodifiable) and be okay. It is only when you artificially disallow modification that would otherwise be technically possible by using DRM that you violate the license.
Of course, I'm sure it would be appreciated if you picked a board capable of modifying the code on the FPGA if a suitable driver existed, and released the information necessary for the community to write one. I don't think too many people would complain about you not spending the effort to write a Free driver yourself in that case.
Wow, two misconceptions packed into one sentence! Impressive!
Tell that to the OpenOffice.org people -- they seem to think the GPL is an EULA too (because they include it in the installer where an EULA usually goes and force you to click "I Agree" to install).
Not quite. You can even do that, if you also give the user the ability to "approve" binaries himself.
This is a lie.
The truth is that you can distribute GPL 3 code on any hardware you want, even hardware that refuses to run unsigned binaries, and including the fucking TiVo! All you have to do is give the user the key so that he can sign modified binaries himself and run them.
You could have sued Ebay too...
Wow, that's cool. Construct a program to convert someone's whistling or humming to a compatible string of letters, and you'd be set!
Pro tip: there's a difference between kissing and mouth-to-mouth resuscitation.
So browsers other than IE support (to varying degrees) referencing SVG drawings using the <img> or <object> tags. But that doesn't go far enough, IMHO; since both SVG and XHTML are both XML, I'd like to be able to embed either within the other, e.g. by putting a SVG polygon or circle on a webpage (surrounded by HTML), with another field of HTML embedded inside it.
Except those Scientology ones a while back...
WTF is taking them so long?!
Here in 2008, I'm only interested in Free Software-friendly 802.11 N routers. Anybody know of any?
It already exists, and is called the Open Dynamics Engine. It'd be nice if somebody made a version reimplemented on top of CUDA or CTM, though.
Exactly, and that's what's wrong! If we simply forced content delivery and connectivity to always be performed by entirely separate, independent companies then we wouldn't have this problem.
Indeed. Who cares about raytracing? The next big thing in games is procedural generation of content!
If they hope that people will bring them home if they miss the enemy, then they're fucking stupid. How is anybody going to notice whether they're missing or not, let alone whether they're doing it on purpose? If they really want to go home, then they ought to just refuse to fire at all -- that'll get them home a lot faster!
Food has been getting more expensive mostly because of increased shipping costs, not biodiesel.
Absolutely...
The solution to this is blindingly obvious: run the farm equipment and other production machinery on ethanol* too! Obviously it reduces the net yield, but as long as it's positive it's okay (and if it weren't positive, nobody would consider doing it anyway).
And 85% is a lot! Besides, that's where my "gasoline synthesis" idea comes in.
Actually, they aren't -- see this other response.
Or we could quit funding the Iraq war for a day or two (and yes, that's hyperbole, but you get my point).
The problem is not the oil running out, the problem is it becoming too hard to increase production. Even though there would still be quite a lot of oil left, the high cost would cause economic havoc. Considering the skyrocketing prices in the last year, I think this is happening as we speak.
(*Actually biodiesel, because existing equipment is diesel-based)
Why not? That's only about 3 per state, you know -- seems reasonable to me! It's not as if nuclear power plants take up that much space. (Besides, you could always just build fewer, larger plants.)
And? So it'd maybe be a bit annoying to build. Compared to impoverishing ourselves to OPEC, killing ourselves with pollution/global warming/whatever, etc. isn't it worth it?