I think this is good. Professionals should get paid to do a job. Compensation should depend on the individual situation, not on some blanket rule.
If you are paid hourly, overtime should be paid. If you are salary, you don't get overtime. I would think that most non entry level white collar jobs should be leaning towards the salary job. There is a certain level of self supervision required at that point. If you are self supervising your daily activities the hours you work should be your own responsiblity.
The GPL does not permit this bundling. It is clearly linked, and it is not the source code. To distribute it like this is a violation of the GPL. Your choices in your situation would be to add the driver yourself. The supplier could likely write a trivial patch to install it into your kernel source. You could then freely use it.
You're complaining about debian holding you hostage when it is actually the supplier of the closed module who is causing the problem. They could always release a GPL compatible driver.
Of course if the GPL permitted you to discriminate, every additional author would add their own condition. We would end up with EULAs reflecting the worst parts of a poorly written law. It wouldn't accomplish the goals, and it would hurt the goals that were intended.
I will try to explain it. Please assume that the 'product' is basically a commodity.
A product is $5 when made in the US. Offshore cost is $4. Protectionist view. Add $1 tarrif to imported product. Product is $5 for either supplier, US gets no exports. Consumers pay $1 more then the rest of the world for the same product.
Other option. The US company brings their cost to $4. The US company can now sell their product globally. The consumer pays the same price as the rest of the world.
Lets say this is with production equipment. In option A, the company has to pay 25% more than an offshore competitor for their manufacturing equipment. This means before they have even made a product, it is more expensive to do business in the US. This is why although a tarrif will help company A, it will hurt downstream customers.
It is a nasty spiral, eventually it will result a globally uncompetative country, with no exports, which will make imports terribly expensive.
The best solution is to be competative, either on price, or a better product.
This will force the US based companies to pay more, making them even less competative on the global marketplace.
So rather then just outsourcing a portion of the company, they move the entire company or workgroup offshore. Or they cover this extra overhead and remain less competative.
I think this is interesting. Accuracy is important for a good reputation, and in this world of overwhelming choice, it is a valuable commodity. Nobody is going to want an always wrong news source. However people have short memories, and don't really check facts.
I think the traditional news media has little competition, there are a few big papers available everywhere, and they have their particular market. Very hard for a new player to get in there. Online there is a lot more competition, and they have access to the same distribution channels. If a superior competitor comes up, they can win.
Google is currently ruling the online search because they do it right. News sites will be the same.
Responsiblity, the 'media' has a responsiblity, but sometimes they shirk it, and hopefully the public will accept this less. When it is possible for even a popular news source to be ditched this may change. Or we might get news media that just spouts popular opinion to stay "in power", then everyone will be scared to speak the truth.
Plain carbon steel is generally easy to deal with. Alloy steels are trickier, but generally not that different as they are still ferrous metals. I think this is what the poster is refering to.
Non ferrous metals can be totally different, you can't just weld aluminum, Titanium or Tungsten, and that is the point of the article. These materials require very different procedures.
Part of the license for SCO Unix says that they may demand such a certification of compliance.
No the contract states that they can request compliance to the license agreement.
Companies like DC do not know, and can not confirm that there is or is not SCO code in Linux, therefore they can not certify such a thing. This is just as ridiculous as asking them to certify there is no SCO code in MS windows, they just can't confirm it either way.
Do you really think that SCO will have any money left to pay the costs of IBM, Redhat, the people that tried for injunctions, those losing business due to the public statements of SCO. They don't have enough money NOW to cover this damage, what makes you think they'd pay for it later?
I don't understand why Linux end users are different from Windows end users in a liability sense
If MS provides code to you in violation of copyright, it isn't any different than if Redhat did. The only problem is that since there is no code to lock at and it is all a big secret, people assume that closed source companies own all of it. (And they definately don't, there are huge amounts of licenced code in there)
A license is just a grant of permission to do something that may otherwise not be permitted.
A contract is an agreement.
You can not enter my house without permission (law) I grant you a license to enter with the condition that you do not smash my windows. (permission) If you enter and do not smash the window everything is okay. If you enter and smash the window, you are now trespassing, because you do not have permission.
You have a license to use and distribute the software. If VIA comes after you, you can simply show that you have a license, and you received it from them.
If a VIA employee posted it on an official website I would think that you can have a good expectation that this was properly authorized. It would be pretty hard for them to argue you knew this wasn't valid.
Yes the creators should be allowed to change their mind at the last minute, but not after it has already passed.
Other important factors are He lied, he said he was going only slightly over the speed limit. There was a huge amount of damage, that was not representative of his claimed speed. There were no skid marks (Although ABS may limit them)
The investigators got a court order to look at the black box. They already had evidence that he was going faster then he claimed. And that he didn't try to prevent or reduce the accident.
The only thing the black box did was confirm evidence they already had, and make it more precise (exact speed, and that he didn't hit the brakes.)
The thing is your elected representatives probaly don't want those things either. If they do elect some that do.
IMH(and Naive) Opinion, the politicians actually want to help make a good stable country that they, their friends, and family can live in.
Even some rather unpopular leaders can be seen acting in what they think is the best interest of the world, their country, or at least those who vote for them. Just happens that some of them make bad decisions.
I'd rather that an "expert" either person or algorithm flag and audit people, then just a random sampling of Joe Minimum wage who isn't going to have a paper trail anyway.
Great, now when I read an article full of links, I don't know if those links have relevant information put there by the author (like slashdot stories) Or if it is just garbage trying to sell me yet another penis enlargement kit.
The funny or not funny thing is that the RIAA and other groups HAVE been pressuring the US gov to legislate such features. I think a senator even supported this idea.
I can't think of anything you can't do in excel. You could make the first 4 pages with formatting, then simply import the csv values into a third source page.
I appreciate that Excel gives me the capability to make simple semi automated forms that look nice. Prevents simple errors, and they're easy to use.
I'm finding that there are fewer and fewer good strategy games available. Most have mindnumbingly dumb AI. Once you get past the point where they vastly overpower you, they become quite easy.
What are you talking about, the economy is in fine shape. Sure we're not in the bubble years with money for any stupid idea, and jobs everywhere. But companies are making and selling products, unemployment is at slightly lower then historical levels. By any reasonable measure everything is just fine, just compared to the blast that we had over the past few years, it feels a little tight right now.
Slashdot Mirror
I think this is good.
Professionals should get paid to do a job.
Compensation should depend on the individual situation, not on some blanket rule.
If you are paid hourly, overtime should be paid.
If you are salary, you don't get overtime.
I would think that most non entry level white collar jobs should be leaning towards the salary job. There is a certain level of self supervision required at that point. If you are self supervising your daily activities the hours you work should be your own responsiblity.
The GPL does not permit this bundling. It is clearly linked, and it is not the source code.
To distribute it like this is a violation of the GPL.
Your choices in your situation would be to add the driver yourself. The supplier could likely write a trivial patch to install it into your kernel source. You could then freely use it.
You're complaining about debian holding you hostage when it is actually the supplier of the closed module who is causing the problem. They could always release a GPL compatible driver.
Of course if the GPL permitted you to discriminate, every additional author would add their own condition.
We would end up with EULAs reflecting the worst parts of a poorly written law.
It wouldn't accomplish the goals, and it would hurt the goals that were intended.
I will try to explain it. Please assume that the 'product' is basically a commodity.
A product is $5 when made in the US.
Offshore cost is $4.
Protectionist view.
Add $1 tarrif to imported product.
Product is $5 for either supplier, US gets no exports.
Consumers pay $1 more then the rest of the world for the same product.
Other option.
The US company brings their cost to $4.
The US company can now sell their product globally.
The consumer pays the same price as the rest of the world.
Lets say this is with production equipment.
In option A, the company has to pay 25% more than an offshore competitor for their manufacturing equipment. This means before they have even made a product, it is more expensive to do business in the US. This is why although a tarrif will help company A, it will hurt downstream customers.
It is a nasty spiral, eventually it will result a globally uncompetative country, with no exports, which will make imports terribly expensive.
The best solution is to be competative, either on price, or a better product.
This is just protectionism, and will backfire.
This will force the US based companies to pay more, making them even less competative on the global marketplace.
So rather then just outsourcing a portion of the company, they move the entire company or workgroup offshore. Or they cover this extra overhead and remain less competative.
I think this is interesting.
Accuracy is important for a good reputation, and in this world of overwhelming choice, it is a valuable commodity.
Nobody is going to want an always wrong news source.
However people have short memories, and don't really check facts.
I think the traditional news media has little competition, there are a few big papers available everywhere, and they have their particular market. Very hard for a new player to get in there.
Online there is a lot more competition, and they have access to the same distribution channels. If a superior competitor comes up, they can win.
Google is currently ruling the online search because they do it right. News sites will be the same.
Responsiblity, the 'media' has a responsiblity, but sometimes they shirk it, and hopefully the public will accept this less.
When it is possible for even a popular news source to be ditched this may change.
Or we might get news media that just spouts popular opinion to stay "in power", then everyone will be scared to speak the truth.
Plain carbon steel is generally easy to deal with.
Alloy steels are trickier, but generally not that different as they are still ferrous metals. I think this is what the poster is refering to.
Non ferrous metals can be totally different, you can't just weld aluminum, Titanium or Tungsten, and that is the point of the article.
These materials require very different procedures.
If a Macdonald's employee spills coffee all over you, you think that is "properly authorized" as well?
No, but if they were properly authorized to serve coffee as part of their job, and then spill it, the company is responsible. (at least in part)
Part of the license for SCO Unix says that they may demand such a certification of compliance.
No the contract states that they can request compliance to the license agreement.
Companies like DC do not know, and can not confirm that there is or is not SCO code in Linux, therefore they can not certify such a thing.
This is just as ridiculous as asking them to certify there is no SCO code in MS windows, they just can't confirm it either way.
Do you really think that SCO will have any money left to pay the costs of IBM, Redhat, the people that tried for injunctions, those losing business due to the public statements of SCO.
They don't have enough money NOW to cover this damage, what makes you think they'd pay for it later?
Nothing is different.
I don't understand why Linux end users are different from Windows end users in a liability sense
If MS provides code to you in violation of copyright, it isn't any different than if Redhat did.
The only problem is that since there is no code to lock at and it is all a big secret, people assume that closed source companies own all of it. (And they definately don't, there are huge amounts of licenced code in there)
A license is just a grant of permission to do something that may otherwise not be permitted.
A contract is an agreement.
You can not enter my house without permission (law)
I grant you a license to enter with the condition that you do not smash my windows. (permission)
If you enter and do not smash the window everything is okay.
If you enter and smash the window, you are now trespassing, because you do not have permission.
You have a license to use and distribute the software.
If VIA comes after you, you can simply show that you have a license, and you received it from them.
If a VIA employee posted it on an official website I would think that you can have a good expectation that this was properly authorized. It would be pretty hard for them to argue you knew this wasn't valid.
Yes the creators should be allowed to change their mind at the last minute, but not after it has already passed.
Yes, but this makes it harder to estimate speed.
If it is a solid black skid it becomes a relatively simple dynamics problem.
Other important factors are
He lied, he said he was going only slightly over the speed limit.
There was a huge amount of damage, that was not representative of his claimed speed.
There were no skid marks (Although ABS may limit them)
The investigators got a court order to look at the black box. They already had evidence that he was going faster then he claimed. And that he didn't try to prevent or reduce the accident.
The only thing the black box did was confirm evidence they already had, and make it more precise (exact speed, and that he didn't hit the brakes.)
The thing is your elected representatives probaly don't want those things either.
If they do elect some that do.
IMH(and Naive) Opinion, the politicians actually want to help make a good stable country that they, their friends, and family can live in.
Even some rather unpopular leaders can be seen acting in what they think is the best interest of the world, their country, or at least those who vote for them.
Just happens that some of them make bad decisions.
I'd rather that an "expert" either person or algorithm flag and audit people, then just a random sampling of Joe Minimum wage who isn't going to have a paper trail anyway.
I keep hearing about this, but why?
I just leave stuff running, if I'm going to use it again, what do I gain by closing it.
The memory gets swapped out, shouldn't use any CPU cycles. Even the desk space shouldn't matter, minimize it, or throw it on another desktop.
For most applications I see this as about as outdated as rebooting.
Great, now when I read an article full of links, I don't know if those links have relevant information put there by the author (like slashdot stories)
Or if it is just garbage trying to sell me yet another penis enlargement kit.
The funny or not funny thing is that the RIAA and other groups HAVE been pressuring the US gov to legislate such features.
I think a senator even supported this idea.
Sure, in windows you can use python.
I'm sure somewhere in openoffice, kspread or gnumeric you could hook into that file filter too.
I can't think of anything you can't do in excel.
You could make the first 4 pages with formatting, then simply import the csv values into a third source page.
I appreciate that Excel gives me the capability to make simple semi automated forms that look nice.
Prevents simple errors, and they're easy to use.
So the more complicated filter will cost more.
People will probaly end up paying MORE to get less.
Analog cable is simple, they put a filter and block or release "blocks" of channels.
This is simple, and cheap.
To individually select channels needs more expensive technology, guess who will pay for it?
I'm finding that there are fewer and fewer good strategy games available.
Most have mindnumbingly dumb AI.
Once you get past the point where they vastly overpower you, they become quite easy.
What are you talking about, the economy is in fine shape.
Sure we're not in the bubble years with money for any stupid idea, and jobs everywhere.
But companies are making and selling products, unemployment is at slightly lower then historical levels.
By any reasonable measure everything is just fine, just compared to the blast that we had over the past few years, it feels a little tight right now.