I hope they keep a few captive, because otherwise they will go extinct again the first time that artificial mist breaks down (things tend to break in time, especially in the tropics).
I generally focus my gaze usually directly into their right eye (just pick one, doesn't really matter that much I don't think)...but with that situation or even just friendly ones....it imparts to people that YOU are engaged in them, and interested and listening to them.
Some advice: if you keep staring like that, most people will feel uncomfortable and think there's something wrong with you (autism, sociopathy, perv), unless they're physically/romantically interested in you.
To show interest, periodically look them in the eyes for a few seconds, until your gazes lock. Do this only while talking to them, or they will start wondering why you keep looking at them.
Also, some people can instinctively tell the difference between manipulative tricks and natural behavior, and would immediately dislike you for trying to alter the social balance.
The atmosphere isn't what is causing you to match ground speed, it's your own momentum which was transferred from the ground. You'd just end up in an unstable orbit around the planet. That is, if you'd manage to fly an air propelled craft out of the atmosphere.
We need more people making intelligent decisions about who they vote for.
Kodos: It's true, we are aliens. But what are you going to do about it? It's a two-party system. You have to vote for one of us. Man 1: He's right, this is a two-party system. Man 2: Well I believe I'll vote for a third-party candidate. Kang: Go ahead, throw your vote away.
Yup. This is exactly what I've been doing for years: Only tabs between the line start and the first non-tab char, only spaces after that. It's the only way to make variable tab widths work.
I usually don't bother lining up code on the right (equal signs and such), it costs too much time to maintain and usually leads to a sort of OCD where one spends more time with code format than with code logic.
Side note: I usually put line comments on the line above the code they comment on, that way I don't have to re-indent the second line (// Foobar) in case the code changes (int a = 500;). It's also more convenient for adding a second/third line of comment later.
And the closest thing to a pre-tag seems to be the ecode-tag (basically a cross between quote and pre).
Your account seems to be created specifically for posting positive comments for Microsoft. You might as well add "Disclaimer: I'm paid by MS to say this" to your posts...
the vast improvements that things like [...], instant search
Lol. Win 7 has its strong points, but search definitely isn't one of them...
I've had many experiences where I was searching for a file that I knew existed on my computer, filling out the exact file name in the filter. Each time it took a long time to come up empty. One time the file showed up in the search result only after I manually located it.
Also: good luck figuring out the advanced search options like find by extension (sure, Google will tell you, but it should be a quick assist or at least in some local help text).
I'd rather have the XP search back (classic mode of course, not the dog), flawed as it was, at least it found what I was looking for. Luckily there are some useful 3rd party search tools to 'fix' this.
delete JAVA a computer with it cannot be secured, too many drive by websites
So true. Just now repairing my mom's computer that got infected through Java in the browser. It had all security patches and was running MsSE, but still got pwned...
Also, this process can take energy for example in periods of strong wind when there's a surplus of 'green' energy, and store it for periods of calm
That depends on how fast the conversion process is and whether one can speed it up by feeding it more energy.
Ideally the process would scale with input energy, i.e. you feed it more energy, and it produces more gasoline. But since most processes run in some narrow window of optimal parameters, this is probably not the case.
If the process can't be sped up by more energy, then one would need a large amount of units running in parallel to consume the extra energy. If each unit would generate only a drop of gasoline during this peak, then this might not be economically viable.
If the process is fast enough (produces enough gasoline per unit during the wind peak), then combining the output from multiple units could be viable, depending on the price and operational cost of the unit.
Someone who would murder another human being (not talking about legitimate self-defense here) is either a cold-blooded killer or psychotic.
or temporary insane due to emotional distress (anger being the most common emotion), or thought they had no other choice (being blackmailed, oppressed, depressed), or following some uncontrollable biological urge (usual sexual) followed by the uncontrollable urge to hide the shameful facts,....
Human psychology is complex, and not as black or white you deem it to be. There's a potential killer in all of us...
a program can always be written in assembly that bypasses ANY controls the OS has about accessing different parts of memory, doing file copying, assigning user and admin permissions, and similar things.
You should read up about things like protected mode (30 years old), sandboxing, hypervisors,... . All used to make sure your application doesn't just read/write whatever memory/ports it wants. And just because a compiler translates C to assembly, it doesn't mean you have full control over the generated assembly by tweaking the C-code (that's why there is inline assembly).
The real problem is that the average Joe user doesn't want to be inconvenienced by all this security, he just wants to be able to run that dancing monkey screen saver, and doesn't care that running it with his access rights gives the thing access to his whole disk and the internet. And he will happily click Allow when asked to install a trojan dancing naked girl.
Someone BASE-jumping from ISS may pull some staggering free-fall numbers
Actually, no. Since the ISS is in orbit, any object detaching from it without propulsion would stay in almost the same orbit. To fall to the ground, one would first have to use a rocket to decelerate significantly.
No! Never connect critical computer systems to an intranet (assuming you mean a general purpose internal network).
It's just too easy for a worm infection to create a bridge with the internet, or some person connecting his laptop to his phone to read slashdot and thereby creating a bridge.
These systems should be on their own network, and all communication should be encrypted using public-private key pairs (secure tunnels, so systems can only communicate with other systems when they're allowed to). Managing the keys/tunnels would be a hassle (making sure an authorized human is in the loop), but good security always has its costs.
and violence by our police against the civilian population that simply wasn't present 10 or 15 years ago.
There was probably even more of it, before YouTube and cell phones with video capabilities existed. Now they usually think twice about what they do in public. In any case, it's a small percentage of cops that are involved, but they give all cops a bad name.
So can Samsung now ask for compensation for the lost sales due to the ban? (Honest question to any legal person here that might know. It seems obvious and only fair to me, but justice is seldomly fair lately).
Anyone want to help find stories that mention volumetric printer DRM pre-2008?
Why would anyone want to (help invalidate a patent for a DRM implementation)? This patent would be a good argument against adopting laws that require DRM for 3D printers: the laws would benefit the patent holder most, and thus be biased (not that this ever stopped adoption of laws for big media).
They can make all the DRM patents they want, we're free to not implement them (for now anyway).
Evil flows from homo sapiens. Religion is just an excuse do do evil.
But evil doesn't really exist: it's just a human concept. In the end there are many similarities between groups of chimpanzees fighting over territories and resources, and humans. The animal within us is still strong...
I've been reading up a bit in the meanwhile, so I think I gained a few new insights.
As you can see there is nothing about calling kernel functions from kernel modules. NOT A THING. It is not specially excepted. Kernel functions are not exempt depending on whatever they are public or private interface, because a) modules are not user(space) programs; b) modules are not using system calls (sysctl).
True, this is also why most people regard Linux kernel modules as derived works.
There is not a single non-GPL binary-only kernel module that could be distributed with the kernel, no matter what API is used.
Generally true. Note however that the bulk of the nVidia driver was developed separate from the Linux kernel (for Windows actually), so by itself is not a derivative work. They use a GPL wrapper to interface with the actual driver blob. It's a legal grey area, that has been allowed by the Linux developers.
However, integrating the DMA functionality in the nVidia driver would require specific changes to the proprietary code that would tie it to the Linux kernel, and definitely create a derivative work.
This is even true for firmware, that by its nature doesn't run on the host CPU and doesn't use _any_ kernel api functions. (There is firmware that have been allowed to be included in GPL code.)
Loadable firmware has generally been seen as initialization data that needs to be loaded into a hardware device in order to use it. As long as the manufacturer doesn't restrict redistribution, firmware blobs are allowed in the kernel tree. There are people that disagree with this interpretation, but this is the general consensus.
You are correct that binary-only drivers are only allowed so long as they are not distributed with the kernel, but this is exactly what the problem is. The license explicitly allows separate distribution, but the kernel DRM system enforces additional arbitrary rules on top of that.
Actually the GPL states that you're not allowed to create a derivative work of GPLed code, unless it adheres to the GPL. Even separately, a GPL-incompatible LKM would be a derivative work of the Linux kernel, and the Linux copyright holders could take legal action to prevent its distribution. Under US copyright law, the rights holder controls the preparation of derivative works.
How the module ties to the kernel (dynamic linking, socket, pipe) doesn't matter. If there is an intimate bond between the two (sharing data structures, one can't run without functionality of the other) then it is a derivative work. The exception is when the module was written in isolation from the kernel, and was not solely intended for use in the Linux kernel (examples: the proprietary part of the nVidia driver, Windows network drivers that are loaded with the ndis wrapper).
If this were not so, I could create and distribute a proprietary binary that, when ran by an end-user, would download some GPLed code/binary and link to that to get free functionality. Note that the end-user himself would be free to create such a program, but he again would not be allowed to distribute it.
This is how I understand it, but IANAL. In the end, it's up to the rights holders and the courts to figure it out. So far there haven't been any cases that cleared up all the gray areas.
Part ideology, part pragmatism: Linus wanted to create a kernel with a license that would force everyone to play nice (i.e. share code/improvements), but at the same time he wanted user apps to be able to freely use the kernel as intended, regardless of their license. So he added a preamble to the GPLv2, clarifying that code that links to the public (userland) kernel interfaces is not regarded as derived from the kernel code.
To be clear: if the nVidia driver would be a derivative work of the Linux kernel because it dynamically links to internal kernel code, then it would be illegal to distribute this driver unless it complied with the GPL. Home users would still be allowed to use it, but they would not be able to, unless nVidia violated copyrights.
Slashdot Mirror
I maximized my Firefox on a 1680x1050 display and it showed everything in one screen. But then I realized NoScript was active...
Enabling scripts causes the top part to resize, depending on browser height, so this is definitely a deliberate act.
It says: "I lost my pigeon in a chimney. Please send a new one."
Its stupid to keep the lab animals in the basement
Unless they put it full of eels...
I hope they keep a few captive, because otherwise they will go extinct again the first time that artificial mist breaks down (things tend to break in time, especially in the tropics).
Actually, a bit of googling told me this happened before in 2003.
Lol, missed that one. To be fair, it seems I wasn't the only one thinking you gave people the "crazy eye". ;-)
I generally focus my gaze usually directly into their right eye (just pick one, doesn't really matter that much I don't think)...but with that situation or even just friendly ones....it imparts to people that YOU are engaged in them, and interested and listening to them.
Some advice: if you keep staring like that, most people will feel uncomfortable and think there's something wrong with you (autism, sociopathy, perv), unless they're physically/romantically interested in you.
To show interest, periodically look them in the eyes for a few seconds, until your gazes lock. Do this only while talking to them, or they will start wondering why you keep looking at them.
Also, some people can instinctively tell the difference between manipulative tricks and natural behavior, and would immediately dislike you for trying to alter the social balance.
The atmosphere isn't what is causing you to match ground speed, it's your own momentum which was transferred from the ground. You'd just end up in an unstable orbit around the planet. That is, if you'd manage to fly an air propelled craft out of the atmosphere.
Also: WOOSH !
We need more people making intelligent decisions about who they vote for.
Kodos: It's true, we are aliens. But what are you going to do about it? It's a two-party system. You have to vote for one of us.
Man 1: He's right, this is a two-party system.
Man 2: Well I believe I'll vote for a third-party candidate.
Kang: Go ahead, throw your vote away.
[The Simpsons: Treehouse of Horror VII]
Yup. This is exactly what I've been doing for years: Only tabs between the line start and the first non-tab char, only spaces after that. It's the only way to make variable tab widths work.
I usually don't bother lining up code on the right (equal signs and such), it costs too much time to maintain and usually leads to a sort of OCD where one spends more time with code format than with code logic.
Side note: I usually put line comments on the line above the code they comment on, that way I don't have to re-indent the second line (// Foobar) in case the code changes (int a = 500;). It's also more convenient for adding a second/third line of comment later.
And the closest thing to a pre-tag seems to be the ecode-tag (basically a cross between quote and pre).
that's only like 3 per RT user?
Unless the pirates steal a couple of thousands, in which case it'd be even less.
Your account seems to be created specifically for posting positive comments for Microsoft.
You might as well add "Disclaimer: I'm paid by MS to say this" to your posts...
the vast improvements that things like [...], instant search
Lol. Win 7 has its strong points, but search definitely isn't one of them...
I've had many experiences where I was searching for a file that I knew existed on my computer, filling out the exact file name in the filter. Each time it took a long time to come up empty. One time the file showed up in the search result only after I manually located it.
Also: good luck figuring out the advanced search options like find by extension (sure, Google will tell you, but it should be a quick assist or at least in some local help text).
I'd rather have the XP search back (classic mode of course, not the dog), flawed as it was, at least it found what I was looking for. Luckily there are some useful 3rd party search tools to 'fix' this.
delete JAVA a computer with it cannot be secured, too many drive by websites
So true. Just now repairing my mom's computer that got infected through Java in the browser. It had all security patches and was running MsSE, but still got pwned...
Also, this process can take energy for example in periods of strong wind when there's a surplus of 'green' energy, and store it for periods of calm
That depends on how fast the conversion process is and whether one can speed it up by feeding it more energy.
Ideally the process would scale with input energy, i.e. you feed it more energy, and it produces more gasoline. But since most processes run in some narrow window of optimal parameters, this is probably not the case.
If the process can't be sped up by more energy, then one would need a large amount of units running in parallel to consume the extra energy. If each unit would generate only a drop of gasoline during this peak, then this might not be economically viable.
If the process is fast enough (produces enough gasoline per unit during the wind peak), then combining the output from multiple units could be viable, depending on the price and operational cost of the unit.
Someone who would murder another human being (not talking about legitimate self-defense here) is either a cold-blooded killer or psychotic.
or temporary insane due to emotional distress (anger being the most common emotion), or thought they had no other choice (being blackmailed, oppressed, depressed), or following some uncontrollable biological urge (usual sexual) followed by the uncontrollable urge to hide the shameful facts, ... .
Human psychology is complex, and not as black or white you deem it to be. There's a potential killer in all of us...
a program can always be written in assembly that bypasses ANY controls the OS has about accessing different parts of memory, doing file copying, assigning user and admin permissions, and similar things.
You should read up about things like protected mode (30 years old), sandboxing, hypervisors, ... . All used to make sure your application doesn't just read/write whatever memory/ports it wants.
And just because a compiler translates C to assembly, it doesn't mean you have full control over the generated assembly by tweaking the C-code (that's why there is inline assembly).
The real problem is that the average Joe user doesn't want to be inconvenienced by all this security, he just wants to be able to run that dancing monkey screen saver, and doesn't care that running it with his access rights gives the thing access to his whole disk and the internet. And he will happily click Allow when asked to install a trojan dancing naked girl.
Someone BASE-jumping from ISS may pull some staggering free-fall numbers
Actually, no.
Since the ISS is in orbit, any object detaching from it without propulsion would stay in almost the same orbit.
To fall to the ground, one would first have to use a rocket to decelerate significantly.
Why not leave them on an intranet
No! Never connect critical computer systems to an intranet (assuming you mean a general purpose internal network).
It's just too easy for a worm infection to create a bridge with the internet, or some person connecting his laptop to his phone to read slashdot and thereby creating a bridge.
These systems should be on their own network, and all communication should be encrypted using public-private key pairs (secure tunnels, so systems can only communicate with other systems when they're allowed to). Managing the keys/tunnels would be a hassle (making sure an authorized human is in the loop), but good security always has its costs.
and violence by our police against the civilian population that simply wasn't present 10 or 15 years ago.
There was probably even more of it, before YouTube and cell phones with video capabilities existed. Now they usually think twice about what they do in public.
In any case, it's a small percentage of cops that are involved, but they give all cops a bad name.
So can Samsung now ask for compensation for the lost sales due to the ban? (Honest question to any legal person here that might know. It seems obvious and only fair to me, but justice is seldomly fair lately).
Anyone want to help find stories that mention volumetric printer DRM pre-2008?
Why would anyone want to (help invalidate a patent for a DRM implementation)? This patent would be a good argument against adopting laws that require DRM for 3D printers: the laws would benefit the patent holder most, and thus be biased (not that this ever stopped adoption of laws for big media).
They can make all the DRM patents they want, we're free to not implement them (for now anyway).
Note: I said the evil flows from Islam.
Evil flows from homo sapiens. Religion is just an excuse do do evil.
But evil doesn't really exist: it's just a human concept. In the end there are many similarities between groups of chimpanzees fighting over territories and resources, and humans.
The animal within us is still strong...
As you can see there is nothing about calling kernel functions from kernel modules. NOT A THING. It is not specially excepted. Kernel functions are not exempt depending on whatever they are public or private interface, because a) modules are not user(space) programs; b) modules are not using system calls (sysctl).
True, this is also why most people regard Linux kernel modules as derived works.
There is not a single non-GPL binary-only kernel module that could be distributed with the kernel, no matter what API is used.
Generally true. Note however that the bulk of the nVidia driver was developed separate from the Linux kernel (for Windows actually), so by itself is not a derivative work. They use a GPL wrapper to interface with the actual driver blob. It's a legal grey area, that has been allowed by the Linux developers.
However, integrating the DMA functionality in the nVidia driver would require specific changes to the proprietary code that would tie it to the Linux kernel, and definitely create a derivative work.
This is even true for firmware, that by its nature doesn't run on the host CPU and doesn't use _any_ kernel api functions. (There is firmware that have been allowed to be included in GPL code.)
Loadable firmware has generally been seen as initialization data that needs to be loaded into a hardware device in order to use it. As long as the manufacturer doesn't restrict redistribution, firmware blobs are allowed in the kernel tree. There are people that disagree with this interpretation, but this is the general consensus.
You are correct that binary-only drivers are only allowed so long as they are not distributed with the kernel, but this is exactly what the problem is. The license explicitly allows separate distribution, but the kernel DRM system enforces additional arbitrary rules on top of that.
Actually the GPL states that you're not allowed to create a derivative work of GPLed code, unless it adheres to the GPL. Even separately, a GPL-incompatible LKM would be a derivative work of the Linux kernel, and the Linux copyright holders could take legal action to prevent its distribution. Under US copyright law, the rights holder controls the preparation of derivative works.
How the module ties to the kernel (dynamic linking, socket, pipe) doesn't matter. If there is an intimate bond between the two (sharing data structures, one can't run without functionality of the other) then it is a derivative work. The exception is when the module was written in isolation from the kernel, and was not solely intended for use in the Linux kernel (examples: the proprietary part of the nVidia driver, Windows network drivers that are loaded with the ndis wrapper).
If this were not so, I could create and distribute a proprietary binary that, when ran by an end-user, would download some GPLed code/binary and link to that to get free functionality. Note that the end-user himself would be free to create such a program, but he again would not be allowed to distribute it.
This is how I understand it, but IANAL. In the end, it's up to the rights holders and the courts to figure it out. So far there haven't been any cases that cleared up all the gray areas.
Part ideology, part pragmatism: Linus wanted to create a kernel with a license that would force everyone to play nice (i.e. share code/improvements), but at the same time he wanted user apps to be able to freely use the kernel as intended, regardless of their license. So he added a preamble to the GPLv2, clarifying that code that links to the public (userland) kernel interfaces is not regarded as derived from the kernel code.
To be clear: if the nVidia driver would be a derivative work of the Linux kernel because it dynamically links to internal kernel code, then it would be illegal to distribute this driver unless it complied with the GPL. Home users would still be allowed to use it, but they would not be able to, unless nVidia violated copyrights.