I've had to turn papers into turnitin.com before. You do get a score, but it specifically points out the parts that were copied, along with their source. Teachers _have_ to check it, because it will count quoted passages as plagiarism.
Author agrees to release code under the conditions of the license; user agrees to follow terms of the license when modifying code. An agreement between two parties is a contract.
One of those redistribution rights is permission to distribute modified/derived versions of the source under certain conditions. That is what I (obviously) meant when I opted for the term 'use'.
I'm curious, would you be able to file suit under contract law rather than copyright seeing as how they have broken from the license they agreed to when they were granted permission to use the source code?
I am amazed that congress would vote to spend BILLIONS revisiting a SINGLE stupid rock orbiting our earth while they scoff at and cut off funding in the MILLIONS for a project that is scanning BILLIONS of solar systems for signs of intelligent life (SETI).
SETI is not a government agency.
Thats because NASA hasn't _done_ anything worthwhile in the past 10 years. That is the entire point of this new initiative. I'm sure, however, that there have been advances in robotics due to NASA in the past 10 years.
A lot of that defense budget _does_ bring good to all people. Wasn't it just the other day that there was a slashdot article about USAF grants? Doesn't DARPA fund several open source projects, not to mention their role in creating the internet? Then you have cases where, like NASA, military funding leads to breakthroughs in technology that have multiple applications unrelated to weaponry. There is also the fact that a ton of money is spent on the non-military education of soldiers..
Just because the ultimate goal of the military is to kill people, doesn't mean everything associated with them is evil.
I think you are reading that incorrectly. I don't think the author was trying to say peer-to-peer is inherintly negative, but rather he was specifically attacking those peer-to-peer systems designed with the intent of violating copyrights while intentionally excluding all other forms.
Slashdot Mirror
What the hell are you talking about? 'Change password' is still in Control Panel/User Accounts.
I've had to turn papers into turnitin.com before. You do get a score, but it specifically points out the parts that were copied, along with their source. Teachers _have_ to check it, because it will count quoted passages as plagiarism.
You're faxing it anyway so it will be printed on the other end regardless
Author agrees to release code under the conditions of the license; user agrees to follow terms of the license when modifying code. An agreement between two parties is a contract.
One of those redistribution rights is permission to distribute modified/derived versions of the source under certain conditions. That is what I (obviously) meant when I opted for the term 'use'.
I'm curious, would you be able to file suit under contract law rather than copyright seeing as how they have broken from the license they agreed to when they were granted permission to use the source code?
It accounts for what, $20 of your taxes?
I am amazed that congress would vote to spend BILLIONS revisiting a SINGLE stupid rock orbiting our earth while they scoff at and cut off funding in the MILLIONS for a project that is scanning BILLIONS of solar systems for signs of intelligent life (SETI). SETI is not a government agency.
Thats because NASA hasn't _done_ anything worthwhile in the past 10 years. That is the entire point of this new initiative. I'm sure, however, that there have been advances in robotics due to NASA in the past 10 years.
ISS hasn't even finished being constructed yet.
A lot of that defense budget _does_ bring good to all people. Wasn't it just the other day that there was a slashdot article about USAF grants? Doesn't DARPA fund several open source projects, not to mention their role in creating the internet? Then you have cases where, like NASA, military funding leads to breakthroughs in technology that have multiple applications unrelated to weaponry. There is also the fact that a ton of money is spent on the non-military education of soldiers.. Just because the ultimate goal of the military is to kill people, doesn't mean everything associated with them is evil.
Merriam-Webster defines an initialsim as "an acronym formed from initial letters."
Isn't the whole point of Internet2 to test advanced networking technology like IPv6 to ensure it is ready for primetime?
I think you are reading that incorrectly. I don't think the author was trying to say peer-to-peer is inherintly negative, but rather he was specifically attacking those peer-to-peer systems designed with the intent of violating copyrights while intentionally excluding all other forms.