Why are you killing Javascript?
We are not! Google has a huge interest in keeping the evolution of Javascript on track. In fact, our investment in TC39 (the Javascript standards body) will likely increase somewhat, and we will continue to honestly and whole-heartedly improve the language within the constraints.
No problem. What you described actually worked for a while after they introduced IMAP. But for some unknown (technical?) reason they started filtering the chat logs.
The only ways to export them now seems to be through Gears (which they don't support anymore), or using some kind of scrubber script (which will guaranteed block your account if you download too much).
Sigh. What did I just say? Unless something changed in the last two weeks or so, this doesn't work. Chat logs don't appear in IMAP folders, even when you label them.
There's a reason we walk on rubber soles instead of wooden. A rubber sole deforms, and stores energy in the rubber. A bit later it releases that energy again, and pushes your foot back up.
That is energy efficient, and also the reason why the Achilles tendons are so important for running. They too deform end store/release energy.
So what happens when you tap into this energy? Well, then the rubber would no longer make your foot bounce back. So you'd have to put more effort in your leg muscles to move your foot back up and forward. I imagine it would feel like walking on sand: easy to step into, but more effort to step out of.
Wow. It appears people tend to read things that aren't there. Where did I say ADHD wasn't real? I just said that not everyone who fits the profile has the disorder. I explained it already to the other poster, so feel free to read my comment above.
No need to call names. I'm not saying ADHD isn't real, nor that Autism isn't real.
What I am saying is that they are overdiagnosed by doctors who have a tendency to pigeon-hole every disorder into pre-made profiles. My point being that they most likely see a strong incline of Autism-related disorders because they actively started looking for them.
As it is now, some doctors will label any hyperactive 3y old todler with having ADHD and put them on Ritalin. Past knowledge tells us that most of these "difficult" kids would have grown up into completely normal young adults. But now they grow up thinking they have this disorder, constantly having to take medication. I'm pretty sure it has consequences on their development...
It's the same as with ADHD: once they made a psychological profile for it, and started applying it to everyone, they suddenly found large numbers of sufferers. Of course, in case of ADHD the profile was largely made up, so now they put 3y olds on speed.
It's good to know that there are people whose minds works a bit different from average, but that doesn't mean you have to start putting all people in pigeon holes.
Well, it's a kernel development tool, and not so many people develop driver/kernel code.
But if you look in the right places, you will see those people find it very useful: http://kerneltrap.org/node/112
A debugger is a development tool, you use it to get your (kernel/driver/application) code bug free during that stage. It's not some magic tool that can automatically find bugs (like some static analysis tools can). It is used to get a better understanding of the code while it is running (or after it causes a kernel panic).
to handle the balancing act that is biped walking (and even those units take close to a year to calibrate themselves)
I assume you're hinting at humans. But chicks of many bird species can walk just fine after an hour or so after hatching. And I'm certain it was the same for many species of bipedal dinosaurs...
You might want to take a look at NaCl. It's not exactly what you describe, but it seems to have the security part pinned down. And there are plans for local storage, sockets, etc. You can already use it to run a full DosBox in your browser (running a game with graphics/music/mouse).
For pure GPLv3-only code, yes, but only if you distribute your software. That's why they sometimes call the GPL a viral license.
But libraries are usually released under the Lesser GPL license, which only applies to the library itself and not to the linked code. Dual/multi-licensed libraries are also common (in that case you can choose one of the licenses that suits you most).
Like Rakishi mentioned a bit lower, the license determines the terms under which the original work may be distributed. So you have two options:
1. You do not agree with or abide by the license. In that case the license does not apply, and default copyright law comes into play. Which states that you cannot distribute a work without explicit approval of its author. There are a number of fair use cases that the law allows, but these are limited (educational, illustrational). So even though you can distribute your own executable that uses the DLL, you do not have permission to distribute the DLL unless you license the whole under the GPL.
Notice that the grey area only lies in the question whether or not you are allowed to distribute your own executable (if it's considered derived, then only under the GPL).
2. Your second option is to accept the terms of the GPL, and therefore license the whole under the GPL. This gives you a license that gives you the right to distribute the DLL.
The intent, and the legal aspects of the GPL3 are very clear. Of course a judge may rule against it, but I wouldn't count on it (the GPL held up in all cases so far).
Derivative works is one of these grey areas that are improved in v3.
Section 5.c of the GPL v3 states:
c) You must license the entire work, as a whole, under this
License to anyone who comes into possession of a copy. This
License will therefore apply, along with any applicable section 7
additional terms, to the whole of the work, and all its parts,
regardless of how they are packaged.
So even if you keep the original work in a separate DLL, the whole must still be released under the GPL3.
Besides, if you remove the DLL the whole doesn't do anything usefull anymore, so it's clearly derived, even by v2 standards.
Everytime when we're discussing people pirating proprietary software or games (or movies and music for that matter), people are saying copyrights should be removed and that it's somehow justified to pirate.
Not exactly. In general, the slashdot crowd is against software patents and DRM, which are a completely different matter. That, and the Disney copyright extension acts, which steal from the public domain.
If Calibre was a library ditributed under the Lesser GPL then you would be right.
But it's not, it is the normal GPL that applies here, and even v3, which was specifically designed to eliminate the grey areas from the v2.
Hamstersoft has two options: either immediately cease all distribution of the infringing binaries, or provide the full sources under one of the methods specified in the GPL.
Slashdot Mirror
Besides, Microsoft will fight this all the way.
But... where can Indy hide for the nuclear blast then??
No problem. What you described actually worked for a while after they introduced IMAP. But for some unknown (technical?) reason they started filtering the chat logs.
The only ways to export them now seems to be through Gears (which they don't support anymore), or using some kind of scrubber script (which will guaranteed block your account if you download too much).
Sigh. What did I just say? Unless something changed in the last two weeks or so, this doesn't work. Chat logs don't appear in IMAP folders, even when you label them.
Too bad I still can't export my gTalk chat logs (no, it doesn't work with POP/IMAP).
Like I said in the other reply, see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AM_PM#Confusion_at_noon_and_midnight
I'm afraid that's untrue, see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AM_PM#Confusion_at_noon_and_midnight
AM/PM would not be so bad, if only they could decide on whether 12 AM is noon or midnight...
Firemen know better than to throw water on an oil fire...
There's a reason we walk on rubber soles instead of wooden. A rubber sole deforms, and stores energy in the rubber. A bit later it releases that energy again, and pushes your foot back up.
That is energy efficient, and also the reason why the Achilles tendons are so important for running. They too deform end store/release energy.
So what happens when you tap into this energy? Well, then the rubber would no longer make your foot bounce back. So you'd have to put more effort in your leg muscles to move your foot back up and forward. I imagine it would feel like walking on sand: easy to step into, but more effort to step out of.
Wow. It appears people tend to read things that aren't there. Where did I say ADHD wasn't real?
I just said that not everyone who fits the profile has the disorder.
I explained it already to the other poster, so feel free to read my comment above.
No need to call names. I'm not saying ADHD isn't real, nor that Autism isn't real.
What I am saying is that they are overdiagnosed by doctors who have a tendency to pigeon-hole every disorder into pre-made profiles. My point being that they most likely see a strong incline of Autism-related disorders because they actively started looking for them.
As it is now, some doctors will label any hyperactive 3y old todler with having ADHD and put them on Ritalin. Past knowledge tells us that most of these "difficult" kids would have grown up into completely normal young adults. But now they grow up thinking they have this disorder, constantly having to take medication. I'm pretty sure it has consequences on their development...
See also http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Attention-deficit_hyperactivity_disorder_controversies
It's the same as with ADHD: once they made a psychological profile for it, and started applying it to everyone, they suddenly found large numbers of sufferers. Of course, in case of ADHD the profile was largely made up, so now they put 3y olds on speed.
It's good to know that there are people whose minds works a bit different from average, but that doesn't mean you have to start putting all people in pigeon holes.
I'm pretty sure that most of those verified big artists don't even use their facebook/g+ account, but let their marketing team manage it.
Well, it's a kernel development tool, and not so many people develop driver/kernel code.
But if you look in the right places, you will see those people find it very useful:
http://kerneltrap.org/node/112
A debugger is a development tool, you use it to get your (kernel/driver/application) code bug free during that stage.
It's not some magic tool that can automatically find bugs (like some static analysis tools can).
It is used to get a better understanding of the code while it is running (or after it causes a kernel panic).
Pluto? Is that some sort of moon?
I assume you're hinting at humans. But chicks of many bird species can walk just fine after an hour or so after hatching. And I'm certain it was the same for many species of bipedal dinosaurs...
You might want to take a look at NaCl. It's not exactly what you describe, but it seems to have the security part pinned down. And there are plans for local storage, sockets, etc. You can already use it to run a full DosBox in your browser (running a game with graphics/music/mouse).
For pure GPLv3-only code, yes, but only if you distribute your software. That's why they sometimes call the GPL a viral license.
But libraries are usually released under the Lesser GPL license, which only applies to the library itself and not to the linked code. Dual/multi-licensed libraries are also common (in that case you can choose one of the licenses that suits you most).
Like Rakishi mentioned a bit lower, the license determines the terms under which the original work may be distributed. So you have two options:
1. You do not agree with or abide by the license. In that case the license does not apply, and default copyright law comes into play. Which states that you cannot distribute a work without explicit approval of its author. There are a number of fair use cases that the law allows, but these are limited (educational, illustrational). So even though you can distribute your own executable that uses the DLL, you do not have permission to distribute the DLL unless you license the whole under the GPL.
Notice that the grey area only lies in the question whether or not you are allowed to distribute your own executable (if it's considered derived, then only under the GPL).
2. Your second option is to accept the terms of the GPL, and therefore license the whole under the GPL. This gives you a license that gives you the right to distribute the DLL.
The intent, and the legal aspects of the GPL3 are very clear. Of course a judge may rule against it, but I wouldn't count on it (the GPL held up in all cases so far).
I meant two options to resolve the infringement, but yeah, there is that one too...
Section 5.c of the GPL v3 states:
So even if you keep the original work in a separate DLL, the whole must still be released under the GPL3.
Besides, if you remove the DLL the whole doesn't do anything usefull anymore, so it's clearly derived, even by v2 standards.
Not exactly. In general, the slashdot crowd is against software patents and DRM, which are a completely different matter. That, and the Disney copyright extension acts, which steal from the public domain.
If Calibre was a library ditributed under the Lesser GPL then you would be right.
But it's not, it is the normal GPL that applies here, and even v3, which was specifically designed to eliminate the grey areas from the v2.
Hamstersoft has two options: either immediately cease all distribution of the infringing binaries, or provide the full sources under one of the methods specified in the GPL.