Presumably as Canada (except that one province) speaks the same language as the US, so we use the same word, unlike China and Russia which have their own languages, so we transliterate from their words. And even regarding Quebec, the French word would seem to be "L'astronaute", which I presume either comes from the same root or was outright imported from English.
In the emacs case, by the act of releasing the program under the GPL (distributing the program, stating that it is released under the terms of the GPL, and fulfilling their obligations under the GPL (making the source available, etc.)), they are explicitly granting you and everyone else the right to receive and run the program for any purpose (the FSF refers to this as "freedom 0" in their definition of free software) and also the right to study the workings of the program and also modify it to suit your needs (this is "freedom 1"), without conditions, as stated in section 9 of the GPL.
9. Acceptance Not Required for Having Copies.
You are not required to accept this License in order to receive or run a copy of the Program. Ancillary propagation of a covered work occurring solely as a consequence of using peer-to-peer transmission to receive a copy likewise does not require acceptance. However, nothing other than this License grants you permission to propagate or modify any covered work. These actions infringe copyright if you do not accept this License. Therefore, by modifying or propagating a covered work, you indicate your acceptance of this License to do so.
in this "a copy of the program" refers to both the program and its source code.
In short, you do not need to agree to anything to have those rights to receive, run, and modify the program, as they (the person/people that made the program) have given them to you and everyone else, universally, without any terms or conditions.
the GPL only comes in for you if you want to a) redistribute the program to others or b) share your modifications to the program (distribute derivative works) with others (FSF calls these freedoms 2 and 3 respectively). Under copyright law, you do not have those rights ordinarily. What the GPL does is grant you those 2 rights, but with a few conditions (such as the requirement to make the source available) intended to guarantee that the recipients of your redistribution/modifications maintain the same freedoms you enjoyed.
in the latter case, ATI is not releasing it under the GPL, and thus they are not granting those 2 rights, and you have no right to use the program except under the terms they specific in their license.
The heating oil bit might be it, as I don't know anyone who uses oil for heating. The vast majority here use natural gas (Due to the fact the infrastructure reaches almost everywhere (heavy build-out during the 60s, 70s, and 80s. press copy says it reaches 92% of the population.) and the fact it's convenient, reliable, and competitively priced.), with some rare city people using distributed electric systems, and the occasional propane user in the deep rural areas where the gas pipes don't go.
The FSF's idea of free software has 2 "levels" of freedoms.
Basically, when the programmer releases their software under the GPL, they are granting everyone freedoms 0 and 1 (to use it for any purpose and to modify the program) by the terms of the GPL. You or anyone else do not have to agree to anything to get those freedoms, not the GPL, not anything. You are given them without conditions by the programmer.
Now, the GPL comes in. If you choose to agree to the terms it offers, you get 2 additional freedoms (to redistribute and to share your modifications with everyone), rights that you otherwise don't have, and also accept a few requirements, such as making the source available. If you don't agree to it, you still have those 2 previous freedoms (0 and 1), but not these other 2 (2 and 3), and do not have their requirements either.
Freedoms 0 and 1 are granted just as you say "just does not make any sense". I'm not sure why you feel it doesn't make sense. Are you suspicious of the concept of getting "something for nothing"?
the GPL has nothing at all to do with simply using the software. Use of the program is covered by freedom 0 of FSF's definition of free software and by that definition, you inherently have the right to run the software and use it for any purpose. You also inherently have freedom 1, the right to study how the program works and adapt it to your needs. This is without agreeing to the GPL.
The GPL only comes in for freedoms 2 and 3, which you do not otherwise have, the right to redistribute the software and the right to improve the software and share those improvements for the benefit of everyone, as it sets certain preconditions (the requirement to make the source available, for instance) on such to guarantee the users of your program the all same freedoms you enjoyed.
How do you define "slow"? even 60-80HP is enough to go fast enough to get your license revoked. My 100hp (2.5L inline 4 with a 3-speed lockup automatic) Plymouth acclaim will govern out 105MPH and could likely hit 120 if that wasn't in the way.
All I know is that I pay $3.61 per US gallon for gas. I'd pay US $5.95 per gallon for diesel
And I am wondering what's up with that. Up here (Saskatchewan), diesel is currently 12 cents per litre (45 cents per US gallon) cheaper than regular 87 octane gas.
You are attempting to apply analog rules to digital media. Why exactly should I have to buy a new copy (assuming a new copy is even available) when it is completely technologically viable to make a new copy myself in much less time and likely for much less money?
Losing DRM is a good first step to achieving WINE compatibility. I've seen a good many games where they will work perfectly on WINE, except the stupid DRM system some moron decided was necessary.
I think what he meant was use a normal fission process to generate heat and convert that heat to electricity using RTG-type thermoelectrics and maybe also infrared photoelectrics to boost efficiency.
Depends on the site. one of Livejournal's privating options sets robots exclusion on your page, which removes it from google (though it may still show up on your friends friends lists).
ID3 parsing isn't hard, but doing it for hundreds/thousands of files can end up being a fair wait. Sandisk's sansa flash-based players do it like that and you can be looking at 5+ minutes of "updating index. please wait" after adding/removing a song or two out of a few hundred.
With the current US system, you lose practically automatically as you're out a reasonably large amount of money in legal fees. Sure, you can counter-sue for your costs, but that could very well be several years down the road.
This is why the RIAA's sue-them-all-and-sort-it-out-later campaign has enjoyed such success. the cost of the settlement is significantly less than the cost of fighting it in court, regardless of the validity of their claims.
They were one source of many. It's just that the many parroted them. Putting one egg in each of a hundred baskets doesn't help if all the baskets have the exact same critical flaw.
Aside from the case where little guy day trader causes little guy investors long-term stock to tank. United's stock is still down nearly $2 a share, worth roughly 20% less than it was prior.
Slashdot Mirror
Presumably as Canada (except that one province) speaks the same language as the US, so we use the same word, unlike China and Russia which have their own languages, so we transliterate from their words. And even regarding Quebec, the French word would seem to be "L'astronaute", which I presume either comes from the same root or was outright imported from English.
In the emacs case, by the act of releasing the program under the GPL (distributing the program, stating that it is released under the terms of the GPL, and fulfilling their obligations under the GPL (making the source available, etc.)), they are explicitly granting you and everyone else the right to receive and run the program for any purpose (the FSF refers to this as "freedom 0" in their definition of free software) and also the right to study the workings of the program and also modify it to suit your needs (this is "freedom 1"), without conditions, as stated in section 9 of the GPL.
9. Acceptance Not Required for Having Copies.
You are not required to accept this License in order to receive or
run a copy of the Program. Ancillary propagation of a covered work
occurring solely as a consequence of using peer-to-peer transmission
to receive a copy likewise does not require acceptance. However,
nothing other than this License grants you permission to propagate or
modify any covered work. These actions infringe copyright if you do
not accept this License. Therefore, by modifying or propagating a
covered work, you indicate your acceptance of this License to do so.
in this "a copy of the program" refers to both the program and its source code.
In short, you do not need to agree to anything to have those rights to receive, run, and modify the program, as they (the person/people that made the program) have given them to you and everyone else, universally, without any terms or conditions.
the GPL only comes in for you if you want to a) redistribute the program to others or b) share your modifications to the program (distribute derivative works) with others (FSF calls these freedoms 2 and 3 respectively). Under copyright law, you do not have those rights ordinarily. What the GPL does is grant you those 2 rights, but with a few conditions (such as the requirement to make the source available) intended to guarantee that the recipients of your redistribution/modifications maintain the same freedoms you enjoyed.
in the latter case, ATI is not releasing it under the GPL, and thus they are not granting those 2 rights, and you have no right to use the program except under the terms they specific in their license.
Most of the major cargo shipping companies also carry passengers.
http://thetravelersnotebook.com/how-to/how-to-travel-by-cargo-ship/
Georgia courts (11th circuit) have also decided the same regarding similar terms that concast used.
In general, peaceful solutions only work if the other side is willing to be peaceful.
Still, peaceful solutions are the best, so try those first, but always have a non-peaceful backup plan handy for when they don't work.
The heating oil bit might be it, as I don't know anyone who uses oil for heating. The vast majority here use natural gas (Due to the fact the infrastructure reaches almost everywhere (heavy build-out during the 60s, 70s, and 80s. press copy says it reaches 92% of the population.) and the fact it's convenient, reliable, and competitively priced.), with some rare city people using distributed electric systems, and the occasional propane user in the deep rural areas where the gas pipes don't go.
The FSF's idea of free software has 2 "levels" of freedoms.
Basically, when the programmer releases their software under the GPL, they are granting everyone freedoms 0 and 1 (to use it for any purpose and to modify the program) by the terms of the GPL. You or anyone else do not have to agree to anything to get those freedoms, not the GPL, not anything. You are given them without conditions by the programmer.
Now, the GPL comes in. If you choose to agree to the terms it offers, you get 2 additional freedoms (to redistribute and to share your modifications with everyone), rights that you otherwise don't have, and also accept a few requirements, such as making the source available. If you don't agree to it, you still have those 2 previous freedoms (0 and 1), but not these other 2 (2 and 3), and do not have their requirements either.
Freedoms 0 and 1 are granted just as you say "just does not make any sense". I'm not sure why you feel it doesn't make sense. Are you suspicious of the concept of getting "something for nothing"?
the GPL has nothing at all to do with simply using the software. Use of the program is covered by freedom 0 of FSF's definition of free software and by that definition, you inherently have the right to run the software and use it for any purpose. You also inherently have freedom 1, the right to study how the program works and adapt it to your needs. This is without agreeing to the GPL.
The GPL only comes in for freedoms 2 and 3, which you do not otherwise have, the right to redistribute the software and the right to improve the software and share those improvements for the benefit of everyone, as it sets certain preconditions (the requirement to make the source available, for instance) on such to guarantee the users of your program the all same freedoms you enjoyed.
How do you define "slow"? even 60-80HP is enough to go fast enough to get your license revoked. My 100hp (2.5L inline 4 with a 3-speed lockup automatic) Plymouth acclaim will govern out 105MPH and could likely hit 120 if that wasn't in the way.
All I know is that I pay $3.61 per US gallon for gas. I'd pay US $5.95 per gallon for diesel
And I am wondering what's up with that. Up here (Saskatchewan), diesel is currently 12 cents per litre (45 cents per US gallon) cheaper than regular 87 octane gas.
I agree. The only way I can think of you seeing that much difference between regular and premium would be with forced induction.
You are attempting to apply analog rules to digital media. Why exactly should I have to buy a new copy (assuming a new copy is even available) when it is completely technologically viable to make a new copy myself in much less time and likely for much less money?
Losing DRM is a good first step to achieving WINE compatibility. I've seen a good many games where they will work perfectly on WINE, except the stupid DRM system some moron decided was necessary.
TFA seems to suggest 6 years, so maybe it can dodge the 5 year effect, provided no one updates us on it for a couple years.
If HP is making a version of Linux, I'd put more bets on it being in the vein of HP-UX than as a replacement for windows.
I think what he meant was use a normal fission process to generate heat and convert that heat to electricity using RTG-type thermoelectrics and maybe also infrared photoelectrics to boost efficiency.
On a different planet?
Depends on the site. one of Livejournal's privating options sets robots exclusion on your page, which removes it from google (though it may still show up on your friends friends lists).
Also, everyone needs to make sure they don't have the same name as anyone else.
ID3 parsing isn't hard, but doing it for hundreds/thousands of files can end up being a fair wait. Sandisk's sansa flash-based players do it like that and you can be looking at 5+ minutes of "updating index. please wait" after adding/removing a song or two out of a few hundred.
With the current US system, you lose practically automatically as you're out a reasonably large amount of money in legal fees. Sure, you can counter-sue for your costs, but that could very well be several years down the road.
This is why the RIAA's sue-them-all-and-sort-it-out-later campaign has enjoyed such success. the cost of the settlement is significantly less than the cost of fighting it in court, regardless of the validity of their claims.
They were one source of many. It's just that the many parroted them. Putting one egg in each of a hundred baskets doesn't help if all the baskets have the exact same critical flaw.
Aside from the case where little guy day trader causes little guy investors long-term stock to tank. United's stock is still down nearly $2 a share, worth roughly 20% less than it was prior.
And how about if someone hijacks, say, wsj.com and publishes that every fortune 500 company is taking a dive? Diversification may not help you much.
I fail to see how benefiting from this would be illegal, unless they were the ones to cause it.