I have this model MBP also but so far no troubles (knock on wood). The only problem I'm having is my and my coworker's thunderbolt have a constant noise now.
The mission of the Wikimedia Foundation is to empower and engage people around the world to collect and develop educational content under a free license or in the public domain, and to disseminate it effectively and globally.
The question is does supporting H.264 media files help or hinder their mission?
If their goal is to disseminate the educational content effectively then it would seem logical that they provide a media format that is widely supported.
It's really up to WebM and Ogg to promote their format. Wikimedia should stick to their own mission which is to provide educational content.
uthorities say 71-year-old Curtis Reeves wanted Chad Oulson, 43, to stop texting in the theater. When the texting continued, authorities say he went outside, returned and shot at him. Oulson died at the hospital. His wife was also injured but her wounds were not life-threatening.
It is my understanding that LEOSA only removes the requirement for a conceal carry permit. Private and State property can still prohibit the weapon from being allowed on premise. Also LOESA does not override the gun free school zone law.
What about this exception to the Equal Rights law of 1964?
"EXEMPTION
SEC. 702. This title shall not apply to an employer with respect to the employment of aliens outside any State, or to a religious corporation, association, or society with respect to the employment of individuals of a particular religion to perform work connected with the carrying on by such corporation, association, or society of its religious activities or to an educational institution with respect to the employment of individuals to perform work connected with the educational activities of such institution.
"The two men began to argue and Reeves walked out of the theater. Police said Reeves was going to complain to a theater employee, according to the police report. When Reeves returned, witnesses and authorities said that Oulson asked him if he had gone to tell on him for texting. Oulson reportedly said, in effect: I was just sending a message to my young daughter. Charles Cumming and his adult son were two seats away. Cummings said that when Reeves returned to the theater, he didn't return with a manager. "He came back very irritated," Cummings recalled. Voices were raised. Oulson threw a bag of popcorn at Reeves, according to a police report, and then the former Tampa Police Department officer took out a.380 semi-automatic handgun and shot Oulson."
If you would have taken the time to actually read the news you would have known that the shooter had to leave the theater to retrieve his gun from the car. It is no where in the realm of being self defense.
Of course the summary is wrong and the trolls are already celebrating the shooter.
1) The texter was not young.
2) The movie had not started. It was during the previews.
3) If you read the actual news story you'd learn that the texter was not sending a text at the time of the shooting. In fact the texter told the shooter that he was texting his daughter to check on her before the movie started. The shooter got his feelings hurt and walked out of the theater, got his gun and returned to murder the man and injure his wife who was standing next to him.
Only if the subject is a US citizen or within the US. In this case we are talking about the nationality of an Oracle employee who is a foreign citizen who does not reside in the US.
You didn't read the article did you? This is a civil case of Ian Spandaw because he believes that he was wrongfully terminated. This has noting to do with H1B hiring other than an example of why Ian feels that he was wronged.
My argument is simply that if the protesters don't want google employees living there then there are states full of people willing to have Google employees live with them. If the protestors want to turn San Francisco into another Detroit so that they can afford to live in an area for less than it is worth then I'm just offering Google a method to make that happen.
It's not racial discrimination if the employer was referring to his nationality. The context of the conversation was what would be an acceptable salary offer to bring an Indian to the US corporate office.
It's a little early to pull the old "race card" out. Is the employee an indian (citizen of India)? I can easily interpret that as "$50K/year is good for an indian national."
I personally don't believe that all code should be free either. In my opinion, the GPL does more to ensure on-going freedom for the many (as opposed to the few) than the BSD license does.
I don't think we disagree by much. My point is that the GPL enforces the developer's wishes not the user's. The GPL keeps source code open as the developer intended. I believe the difference in our opinions amount to "The GPL enforces the developer's wishes for user's ultimate good".
It's less debatable than you think
Let's agree to disagree on this point. Earlier you implied that GPL keeps extensions from being proprietary which is only half correct. Nothing prevents the copyright holder of the code to dual license the code and offer a crippled GPL version along side a more up-to-date or feature laden commercial version. GNAT is an example of this.
In the end BSD and its cousins are more popular simply because it more closely aligns with the copyright holder's intention. They wrote something, thought it would be useful to someone else, made it available with very little strings attached, and made it free of some viral clause that make it incompatible with their intended license. Clang is a perfect example of this. Clang conforms to the C++11 standard by design and doesn't have any viral clauses that prevents it being incorporated in anyone's IDE or utility.
I understand exactly what you are saying and I disagree.
I do not subscribe to the all software should be free of charge ideology. I consider the user being able to do anything they want to the code without restriction to be more free than the GPL's you can use are code as long as you make your changes available for free too. GPL protects the original developer of the code. The fact that it protects the ultimate users is very debatable. Especially since the original developer can offer dual licensing.
I would live in the suburbs though I see nothing wrong with the younger folks wanting to live in the city. People who move to the suburbs tend to be married and looking for somewhere to "nest". Single folks would like to live in an apartment in an area where they would bump into other friends who often work for a different employer.
The GPL protects the user's rights because it places no restrictions on their use of the program, it guarantees them access to the (machine-readable) source code for the program, it permits them to redistribute the program unmodified in binary form (as long as they make the source code for that release available along with it) and it permits them to modify the program for their own use. They only have to distribute their changed source code (again, in machine-readable form) if they distribute the modified binary.
The requirement to make all changes available in source code is a restriction. BSD has no such restrictions. The restriction is there to protect the developer's rights not the user's.
A certain Redmond-based software monopoly (convicted in courts the world over) has used this feature of the BSD license to wage its embrace-and-extend lock-in war campaign on the industry.
Actually Microsoft employed EEE on protocols (Kerberos, HTML, etc) by introducing slight variations in the protocol or in HTML's case - Active X, and tried to do it with Java (remember J++ which morphed into C#?). GPL would not have prevented this.
You worry about the infrastructure code being BSD. I just wanted to point out that a large portion of the user land utilities within Linux take advantage of BSD software.
It appears that you are spending too much money trying to satisfy some ungrateful residents that don't like your employees spending their money within their community. Maybe you should consider moving to our state and neighborhood where the taxes are cheaper, the air is cleaner, the cost of living is lower, and the people appreciate employers that bring jobs to the local economy.
Slashdot Mirror
I have this model MBP also but so far no troubles (knock on wood). The only problem I'm having is my and my coworker's thunderbolt have a constant noise now.
There's no difference. He cares more about the ability to listen to Eminem than how much Eminem gets out of the deal.
I believe they meant the content to be under a free license not necessarily the media itself. Besides H.264 is free for the content consumer.
AL.com is the website for the newspaper conglomerate operating in Alabama. If you went to the website you would have known that.
Wikimedia's mission:
The question is does supporting H.264 media files help or hinder their mission?
If their goal is to disseminate the educational content effectively then it would seem logical that they provide a media format that is widely supported.
It's really up to WebM and Ogg to promote their format. Wikimedia should stick to their own mission which is to provide educational content.
This morning the police are saying this:
--AL
It is my understanding that LEOSA only removes the requirement for a conceal carry permit. Private and State property can still prohibit the weapon from being allowed on premise. Also LOESA does not override the gun free school zone law.
Understood.
What about this exception to the Equal Rights law of 1964?
"EXEMPTION
SEC. 702. This title shall not apply to an employer with respect to the employment of aliens outside any State, or to a religious corporation, association, or society with respect to the employment of individuals of a particular religion to perform work connected with the carrying on by such corporation, association, or society of its religious activities or to an educational institution with respect to the employment of individuals to perform work connected with the educational activities of such institution.
The shooter was able to leave, come back, engage in another argument, and shot a man for throwing popcorn.
You have a warped sense of entitlement. Shooting someone for texting is never justified.
If you would have taken the time to actually read the news you would have known that the shooter had to leave the theater to retrieve his gun from the car. It is no where in the realm of being self defense.
The fact that the shooter had to leave and return with his gun negates any far fetch idea that he though his life was endangered.
Of course the summary is wrong and the trolls are already celebrating the shooter.
1) The texter was not young.
2) The movie had not started. It was during the previews.
3) If you read the actual news story you'd learn that the texter was not sending a text at the time of the shooting. In fact the texter told the shooter that he was texting his daughter to check on her before the movie started. The shooter got his feelings hurt and walked out of the theater, got his gun and returned to murder the man and injure his wife who was standing next to him.
Only if the subject is a US citizen or within the US. In this case we are talking about the nationality of an Oracle employee who is a foreign citizen who does not reside in the US.
You didn't read the article did you? This is a civil case of Ian Spandaw because he believes that he was wrongfully terminated. This has noting to do with H1B hiring other than an example of why Ian feels that he was wronged.
Really? How?
My argument is simply that if the protesters don't want google employees living there then there are states full of people willing to have Google employees live with them. If the protestors want to turn San Francisco into another Detroit so that they can afford to live in an area for less than it is worth then I'm just offering Google a method to make that happen.
It's not racial discrimination if the employer was referring to his nationality. The context of the conversation was what would be an acceptable salary offer to bring an Indian to the US corporate office.
It's a little early to pull the old "race card" out. Is the employee an indian (citizen of India)? I can easily interpret that as "$50K/year is good for an indian national."
I don't think we disagree by much. My point is that the GPL enforces the developer's wishes not the user's. The GPL keeps source code open as the developer intended. I believe the difference in our opinions amount to "The GPL enforces the developer's wishes for user's ultimate good".
Let's agree to disagree on this point. Earlier you implied that GPL keeps extensions from being proprietary which is only half correct. Nothing prevents the copyright holder of the code to dual license the code and offer a crippled GPL version along side a more up-to-date or feature laden commercial version. GNAT is an example of this.
In the end BSD and its cousins are more popular simply because it more closely aligns with the copyright holder's intention. They wrote something, thought it would be useful to someone else, made it available with very little strings attached, and made it free of some viral clause that make it incompatible with their intended license. Clang is a perfect example of this. Clang conforms to the C++11 standard by design and doesn't have any viral clauses that prevents it being incorporated in anyone's IDE or utility.
I understand exactly what you are saying and I disagree.
I do not subscribe to the all software should be free of charge ideology. I consider the user being able to do anything they want to the code without restriction to be more free than the GPL's you can use are code as long as you make your changes available for free too. GPL protects the original developer of the code. The fact that it protects the ultimate users is very debatable. Especially since the original developer can offer dual licensing.
I would live in the suburbs though I see nothing wrong with the younger folks wanting to live in the city. People who move to the suburbs tend to be married and looking for somewhere to "nest". Single folks would like to live in an apartment in an area where they would bump into other friends who often work for a different employer.
You contradicted yourself.
The requirement to make all changes available in source code is a restriction. BSD has no such restrictions. The restriction is there to protect the developer's rights not the user's.
Actually Microsoft employed EEE on protocols (Kerberos, HTML, etc) by introducing slight variations in the protocol or in HTML's case - Active X, and tried to do it with Java (remember J++ which morphed into C#?). GPL would not have prevented this.
You worry about the infrastructure code being BSD. I just wanted to point out that a large portion of the user land utilities within Linux take advantage of BSD software.
Dear Google,
It appears that you are spending too much money trying to satisfy some ungrateful residents that don't like your employees spending their money within their community. Maybe you should consider moving to our state and neighborhood where the taxes are cheaper, the air is cleaner, the cost of living is lower, and the people appreciate employers that bring jobs to the local economy.
Sincerely,
The other 49 states.