If it's in the licence you are stuck with it - GPL or anything else. Some people have argued that that the GPL is unreasonable because it insists you shouldn't just cut and paste the code, put your own name on it, and then use it in a closed source project. Whether you feel entitled to other people's stuff or not the price of admission is sticking to whatever terms the code is licenced under, whether that is not being allowed to rip off the code and call it yours or in the other case not allowed to reverse engineer the application. Whether it's not against the law is irrelevant - it's like "no shoes no service", the vendor gets to cut off service if you break their terms of service even if you are not breaking the law.
Jokes aside, I've still got a win2k machine hanging about for a legacy application because VB isn't portable (and it's not a virtual machine because the fucking idiot that wrote their abandonware in VB made sure it won't run without a parallel port dongle). It gets used rarely and the newer software that is to replace it is being written in python - the portability lesson has been learnt.
Clearly if someone considers that CSS is essential for a programmer then they have limited exposure to situations where it is not (ie. anything other than applications to generate web pages). The only sad thing is trying to force that attitude on programmers who have nothing to do with web based applications.
Get real. There are not very many people trapped in Gaza compared with the population of Israel and they have very little in the way of resources. That ghetto is no threat and the current episode of shooting fish in a barrel just happens to coincide with an election, just like the last time. There is no threat to Israel's survival from that quarter and I find it disgusting that you are insulting everyone's intelligence by spewing propaganda along those lines.
Your extreme example of somehow Hamas magically becoming more powerful than Israel, or even remotely comparable, is an utterly ridiculous fantasy.
Are you claiming that Hamas does not seek the destruction of Israel
I am claiming that Hamas has no hope of destroying Israel no matter how many interested Saudis want to donate to them to so they can feel better about being rich. You however appear to be pretending that the team down 1000-nil is a real threat. Why exactly?
The anime "Space Brothers" recently had some NEEMO training episodes. They have advisors from NASA and JAXA so I wonder how closely that holds up to the real training.
Does it matter? What matters is that Tridge fucked around and violated the licence and the fallout hit Linus in the form of having to do a lot of unnecessary work. Being only human this appeared to have made him angry.
I have no idea why you brought the GPL into it
Try reading the above post entire instead of key words then. It's only three lines long. I can wait. If you use software it's only fair to stick to the licence the creator wished you to use - if you don't like it use something else.
You cannot yank your software if it's free, regardless of what license it's under
If someone violates the terms of your licence of course you can.
Linus blowing up at Andrew Tridgdell for "reverse engineering" the bitkeeper protocol comes to mind.
Since it meant that Linus had to go and spend time writing git after bitkeeper was taken away from him due to that licence violation he had a very good reason to be angry. Do you think the GPL is the only licence that should be respected?
Let's try an offline example To welder: That joint is unacceptable. Welder: laughs - just sign it off loser. The situation then does not resolve until someone has the guts to try another approach.
Approach 2 To welder: Your weld is fucked. I can stick a fucking ruler 50mm into this enormous fucking crack here. Welder now gets that the situation is being seen as serious and can not just be fobbed off.
Sometimes you just get ignored if you do not use appropriate language to convey how serious a situation is.
From the standpoint of fighting a war for survival, which the state of Israel is doing
That is how the propaganda frames it. However it's not 1948 any more and there are no serious threats in the region to such a powerful nation. That may change if ISIS unites everyone from Lebanon to Iran and has a decade or two to get their shit together but I can't see that happening outside of their dreams.
Since it's the wrong continent and someone will eventually correct the wikipedia article you are correct, it will go away almost instantly. The real problem in Africa is a different story but like foot binding before it (in another part of the world obviously) it's been slowly going away as well.
The problem is that any suggestion that the current government of Israel is imperfect is taken as "anti-semitic".
I like Israel, it has a lot of good things going for it. However currently it is run by a bunch of fucking fascists who have timed yet another pogrom into Gaza to coincide with an election. That seems to run contrary to everything Israel is supposed to stand for.
It's still not easy and is still very expensive for the reasons given above. There may be less oxide in the shavings than in rutile or titanium dioxide but you still have to get rid of it before it can be melted down - and with a high melting point plus a need to keep oxygen off it's not that cheap to melt the stuff either. Reducing waste with titanium (or titanium alloys) has more of a cost benefit than just about any other non-radioactive metal since the reprocessing cost is high.
refining Titanium from raw 'ores'.
It's gravity separated out of sand so the mining part is as cheap as mining gets - reducing it from an oxide is the very hard bit.
I'm merely replying to your inaccurate "On the other hand, they oppose building broadband, or anything else" and similar rubbish. Please don't attempt to misdirect away from that to avoid responsibility for your own actions. In my country the greens are pushing for broadband and the "conservatives" are opposing it because major donor Rupert doesn't want the competition.
It is actually, meaning "kiss", but a "kiss duct failure" sounds more like supposed plot of "the human centipede" than an engineering problem in Atlanta.
Sadly while it would be "bullshit" with stainless steel it's not so simple with titanium. Recovering metal from the shavings is not as simple as just throwing them in a pot and warming it up, even if you do it in an inert atmosphere. The entire reason why titanium is expensive despite being made from very plentiful sand is because it's bloody hard to reduce the oxide and those shavings are covered with it. That very hard to move oxide is why it's so useful in medical applications but it makes it a difficult material to do anything with.
Also using powder directly removes the step of forming the stuff into large blocks. It's vastly easier to make titanium metal in powder form than fully solid ingots with consistent properties.
It's not easy to reclaim (titanium oxidises very easily so the scrap has to be reduced again, almost as hard as getting it out of sand in the first place) and the consumable costs to machine it are not trivial. Your cutting tools are ripping into titanium oxide, and guess what a lot of the cutting edges of those tools are made of? You can't guess? The answer is stuff like titanium nitride which is not a lot harder, so the tools wear down very rapidly. Using diamond doesn't help much either. It's a very slow and expensive way to do things but used to be better than any other way available. This development is interesting because now it is available it's a lot easier than your "just mill it out of a block" suggestion which is why it's being discussed at all.
given the inherent porosity of sintered material that give purchase for pathogens
The milled stuff has been treated for years to produce a porous surface to allow bone to grow into it. I heard a paper presented on that in 1999 by some Japanese and Californian researchers and it's apparently become standard practice since.
How big of an advantage is that, though? Melting down metal to reuse it is really easy
Not with titanium. It's a bastard of a thing to work with since it oxidises easily enough that the powder makes far too good an explosive for it to be permissable to ship it by air.
When they say 3D printed do they mean a metal mill
It almost always means an additive instead of a subtractive process. Milling cuts things away and is subtractive. 3D printing sticks things together so is additive.
or can we 3D print with any random material now
Yes so long as you keep in mind that 3D printing describes a wide range of methods instead of a single one. In this case it's sintering metal powder one layer at a time with a laser. While expensive it's got some things going for it: It's easier to produce titanium as powder instead of large solid blocks. It's expensive to machine titanium from those solid blocks. Titanium is expensive in general so methods like this with very little waste have an immediate benefit. Laser are very cheap these days, give very good tolerances and don't really use all that much power. After these parts are made they probably don't need any more finishing than a bit of sandblasting.
And if so, why not use the far more tried tested, and better alternative milling?
Because we already know methods like this have several advantages over milling, electrochemical machining, casting, hot isostatic pressing, macro scale welding etc. It's not for everything but this application seems to tick all the boxes where laser sintering makes more sense than anything else.
It's porous but that actually helps with incorporation into the body. I'm a bit out of touch now but in 1999 experiments with implanting porous titanium implants treated in caustic soda into mice resulted in very strong metal to bone connections after only a few weeks. So while it's horrible strength compared with solid titanium outside the body it's very likely to be higher strength inside the body than a solid implant. Besides, bone is not very strong in comparison to titanium - which actually has been a problem with metal joints for years since the metal grinds away at the bone it is inserted into. Typically that's why metal joints have been replaced - the metal bits are fine but the bone they are connected to has worn down and a longer joint is required.
You live in a country where a far too common morality (or amorality if you prefer) is that it is virtuous to make money by any means that is not illegal. That huge tangle of rules and "big government" that you rail at is the only thing that stands in the way of situations like the poisoned milk incident in China. The price of the freedom to have such a morality is the state putting in rules to limit the damage. It does suck in many ways but it's a trade off to avoid the full Oligarchy that would happen if the government (and the people who vote in this case) was too "small" to have much of a say about how society is run. A balance is hard to strike and the corrupt are pushing hard to remove as much balance as they can so they can profit to the injust disadvantage of others (eg. removing rules on water rights has resulted in farmers downstream with a dry river bed).
It seems some of the things you hate about the greens are really about hating the idea of democracy in general which is why I've been spending time replying to your posts despite not giving a shit about your local green party. Is that correct or have you just been making some sort of overblown comments for effect and do not really have such an extreme view?
I'm saying your interpretation defies reality. "It's pretty clear, isn't it, that they are for more government - WAY more government". Just like Homeland Security is way less government? How many people does it really take to draw up a few rules for an industry? How does that expand to the "big brother" dystopia you are pretending they want? Sadly that tells us more about yourself than anything else which makes the contribution to the discussion you made above almost entirely worthless IMHO.
I've seen that view expressed seriously in this place far more times than I wish to remember - typically followed by a discussion of what a "real" libertarian is.
Take the blinkers off and see what is actually happening. For instance compare how portions of the Army and Veteran's hospitals do things compared with private enterprise. If you really want to see "building a cadre of elitist bureaucrats" take a look at some hospitals in private enterprise and some "too big to fail" companies. Trying to pretend bad management is inherent in either the public or private systems is somewhat simplistic, and to be frank, utterly stupid. You can get it anywhere if you have the wrong horse judges doing "a heck of a job". You tend to see it more in public institutions when they adopt the worst private methods of promotion (old roommate, cousin, guy in the tennis club, he/she looks cute) instead of procedural methods (evaluation to see if the person to be promoted has actually been doing a good job).
Slashdot Mirror
If it's in the licence you are stuck with it - GPL or anything else.
Some people have argued that that the GPL is unreasonable because it insists you shouldn't just cut and paste the code, put your own name on it, and then use it in a closed source project. Whether you feel entitled to other people's stuff or not the price of admission is sticking to whatever terms the code is licenced under, whether that is not being allowed to rip off the code and call it yours or in the other case not allowed to reverse engineer the application. Whether it's not against the law is irrelevant - it's like "no shoes no service", the vendor gets to cut off service if you break their terms of service even if you are not breaking the law.
Jokes aside, I've still got a win2k machine hanging about for a legacy application because VB isn't portable (and it's not a virtual machine because the fucking idiot that wrote their abandonware in VB made sure it won't run without a parallel port dongle).
It gets used rarely and the newer software that is to replace it is being written in python - the portability lesson has been learnt.
Clearly if someone considers that CSS is essential for a programmer then they have limited exposure to situations where it is not (ie. anything other than applications to generate web pages). The only sad thing is trying to force that attitude on programmers who have nothing to do with web based applications.
Get real. There are not very many people trapped in Gaza compared with the population of Israel and they have very little in the way of resources. That ghetto is no threat and the current episode of shooting fish in a barrel just happens to coincide with an election, just like the last time.
There is no threat to Israel's survival from that quarter and I find it disgusting that you are insulting everyone's intelligence by spewing propaganda along those lines.
Your extreme example of somehow Hamas magically becoming more powerful than Israel, or even remotely comparable, is an utterly ridiculous fantasy.
I am claiming that Hamas has no hope of destroying Israel no matter how many interested Saudis want to donate to them to so they can feel better about being rich.
You however appear to be pretending that the team down 1000-nil is a real threat. Why exactly?
The anime "Space Brothers" recently had some NEEMO training episodes. They have advisors from NASA and JAXA so I wonder how closely that holds up to the real training.
Does it matter? What matters is that Tridge fucked around and violated the licence and the fallout hit Linus in the form of having to do a lot of unnecessary work. Being only human this appeared to have made him angry.
Try reading the above post entire instead of key words then. It's only three lines long. I can wait.
If you use software it's only fair to stick to the licence the creator wished you to use - if you don't like it use something else.
If someone violates the terms of your licence of course you can.
Since it meant that Linus had to go and spend time writing git after bitkeeper was taken away from him due to that licence violation he had a very good reason to be angry.
Do you think the GPL is the only licence that should be respected?
Let's try an offline example
To welder: That joint is unacceptable.
Welder: laughs - just sign it off loser.
The situation then does not resolve until someone has the guts to try another approach.
Approach 2
To welder: Your weld is fucked. I can stick a fucking ruler 50mm into this enormous fucking crack here.
Welder now gets that the situation is being seen as serious and can not just be fobbed off.
Sometimes you just get ignored if you do not use appropriate language to convey how serious a situation is.
That is how the propaganda frames it. However it's not 1948 any more and there are no serious threats in the region to such a powerful nation. That may change if ISIS unites everyone from Lebanon to Iran and has a decade or two to get their shit together but I can't see that happening outside of their dreams.
Since it's the wrong continent and someone will eventually correct the wikipedia article you are correct, it will go away almost instantly.
The real problem in Africa is a different story but like foot binding before it (in another part of the world obviously) it's been slowly going away as well.
The problem is that any suggestion that the current government of Israel is imperfect is taken as "anti-semitic".
I like Israel, it has a lot of good things going for it. However currently it is run by a bunch of fucking fascists who have timed yet another pogrom into Gaza to coincide with an election. That seems to run contrary to everything Israel is supposed to stand for.
It's gravity separated out of sand so the mining part is as cheap as mining gets - reducing it from an oxide is the very hard bit.
I'm merely replying to your inaccurate "On the other hand, they oppose building broadband, or anything else" and similar rubbish. Please don't attempt to misdirect away from that to avoid responsibility for your own actions.
In my country the greens are pushing for broadband and the "conservatives" are opposing it because major donor Rupert doesn't want the competition.
It is actually, meaning "kiss", but a "kiss duct failure" sounds more like supposed plot of "the human centipede" than an engineering problem in Atlanta.
Sadly while it would be "bullshit" with stainless steel it's not so simple with titanium. Recovering metal from the shavings is not as simple as just throwing them in a pot and warming it up, even if you do it in an inert atmosphere.
The entire reason why titanium is expensive despite being made from very plentiful sand is because it's bloody hard to reduce the oxide and those shavings are covered with it.
That very hard to move oxide is why it's so useful in medical applications but it makes it a difficult material to do anything with.
Also using powder directly removes the step of forming the stuff into large blocks. It's vastly easier to make titanium metal in powder form than fully solid ingots with consistent properties.
It's not easy to reclaim (titanium oxidises very easily so the scrap has to be reduced again, almost as hard as getting it out of sand in the first place) and the consumable costs to machine it are not trivial. Your cutting tools are ripping into titanium oxide, and guess what a lot of the cutting edges of those tools are made of? You can't guess? The answer is stuff like titanium nitride which is not a lot harder, so the tools wear down very rapidly. Using diamond doesn't help much either. It's a very slow and expensive way to do things but used to be better than any other way available.
This development is interesting because now it is available it's a lot easier than your "just mill it out of a block" suggestion which is why it's being discussed at all.
The milled stuff has been treated for years to produce a porous surface to allow bone to grow into it. I heard a paper presented on that in 1999 by some Japanese and Californian researchers and it's apparently become standard practice since.
Not with titanium. It's a bastard of a thing to work with since it oxidises easily enough that the powder makes far too good an explosive for it to be permissable to ship it by air.
It almost always means an additive instead of a subtractive process. Milling cuts things away and is subtractive. 3D printing sticks things together so is additive.
Yes so long as you keep in mind that 3D printing describes a wide range of methods instead of a single one. In this case it's sintering metal powder one layer at a time with a laser. While expensive it's got some things going for it:
It's easier to produce titanium as powder instead of large solid blocks.
It's expensive to machine titanium from those solid blocks.
Titanium is expensive in general so methods like this with very little waste have an immediate benefit.
Laser are very cheap these days, give very good tolerances and don't really use all that much power. After these parts are made they probably don't need any more finishing than a bit of sandblasting.
Because we already know methods like this have several advantages over milling, electrochemical machining, casting, hot isostatic pressing, macro scale welding etc. It's not for everything but this application seems to tick all the boxes where laser sintering makes more sense than anything else.
It's porous but that actually helps with incorporation into the body. I'm a bit out of touch now but in 1999 experiments with implanting porous titanium implants treated in caustic soda into mice resulted in very strong metal to bone connections after only a few weeks.
So while it's horrible strength compared with solid titanium outside the body it's very likely to be higher strength inside the body than a solid implant.
Besides, bone is not very strong in comparison to titanium - which actually has been a problem with metal joints for years since the metal grinds away at the bone it is inserted into. Typically that's why metal joints have been replaced - the metal bits are fine but the bone they are connected to has worn down and a longer joint is required.
You live in a country where a far too common morality (or amorality if you prefer) is that it is virtuous to make money by any means that is not illegal. That huge tangle of rules and "big government" that you rail at is the only thing that stands in the way of situations like the poisoned milk incident in China.
The price of the freedom to have such a morality is the state putting in rules to limit the damage.
It does suck in many ways but it's a trade off to avoid the full Oligarchy that would happen if the government (and the people who vote in this case) was too "small" to have much of a say about how society is run. A balance is hard to strike and the corrupt are pushing hard to remove as much balance as they can so they can profit to the injust disadvantage of others (eg. removing rules on water rights has resulted in farmers downstream with a dry river bed).
It seems some of the things you hate about the greens are really about hating the idea of democracy in general which is why I've been spending time replying to your posts despite not giving a shit about your local green party. Is that correct or have you just been making some sort of overblown comments for effect and do not really have such an extreme view?
Of course not but it doesn't matter. They just want an excuse to put figarative heads on pikes of those caught to show that something is being done.
I'm saying your interpretation defies reality. "It's pretty clear, isn't it, that they are for more government - WAY more government". Just like Homeland Security is way less government? How many people does it really take to draw up a few rules for an industry? How does that expand to the "big brother" dystopia you are pretending they want?
Sadly that tells us more about yourself than anything else which makes the contribution to the discussion you made above almost entirely worthless IMHO.
I've seen that view expressed seriously in this place far more times than I wish to remember - typically followed by a discussion of what a "real" libertarian is.
Take the blinkers off and see what is actually happening. For instance compare how portions of the Army and Veteran's hospitals do things compared with private enterprise. If you really want to see "building a cadre of elitist bureaucrats" take a look at some hospitals in private enterprise and some "too big to fail" companies.
Trying to pretend bad management is inherent in either the public or private systems is somewhat simplistic, and to be frank, utterly stupid. You can get it anywhere if you have the wrong horse judges doing "a heck of a job". You tend to see it more in public institutions when they adopt the worst private methods of promotion (old roommate, cousin, guy in the tennis club, he/she looks cute) instead of procedural methods (evaluation to see if the person to be promoted has actually been doing a good job).