t's because Apple won't open their DRM to other distributors, because Apple doesn't want the hassle of maintaining this DRM (that it doesn't want in the first place and only has to use because companies like Universal insist on it) for every other distributor.
Bollocks. They won't open it because they want to continue to rake in money by being the only seller of major-label music for the ipod (yes, I know you can buy a cd and encode it yourself. Most people don't, and it's a lot more hassle)
But aren't mechanical shocks more common for your typical computer? And won't these machines take far more damage from them than current solid-state ram?
Re:How will the FSF/GNU handle the GPL 3 revolt?
on
GCC 4.2.1 Released
·
· Score: 1
Erm, the copyright statement itself; you just exercise your option ("at your option any later version") to distribute the program under the terms of the GPLv3.
Re:The license of glibc is much more interesting
on
GCC 4.2.1 Released
·
· Score: 1
In contrast, if glibc some day moves to LGPLv3, what will happen to GPLv2-only applications and libraries (git, Qt, MySQL,...)? LGPLv3 is incompatible with GPLv2-only.
The copyright holders for those GPLv2-only applications will add a special exception to their license, like was done for Qt back in the day. Or they'll move on and allow GPLv3. Either way it's not a big issue.
This has nothing to do with FUD, am I wrong for disagreeing with the way the FSF is handling things as of late?
What has changed? What is the FSF doing differently from the way they were 2, 5, 20 years ago? All that's changed is the amount of FUD being chucked around.
I have better things to do then worry "Opps, shit did I link with something that requires I release the source".
And what is your magic way of avoiding this problem on other OSes, except by changing it into "Opps, shit did I link with something that requires I don't distribute at all"? Do tell.
Re:How will the FSF/GNU handle the GPL 3 revolt?
on
GCC 4.2.1 Released
·
· Score: 1
Are you sure that this is the case? It would seem to me that they cannot change the text in the COPYING file, and thus the only thing they can do is distribute as "GPLv2 or later" themselves.
Erm, what? They can write their own COPYING file giving people permission to distribute it under the GPLv3.
Well, there were definitely shades of gray in the book and series--the revelation of how truly great a man Snape was
Not any shades of grey that get explored in the book - he's just a good guy.
the surprising turn of Draco,
Didn't happen in any way I saw; he just cared more about saving his own life than being evil.
the loss of Dumbledore as a faultless character,
Really jars with the other books; just isn't believable
Harry doing a lot of wrong shit through all 7 books
One of the better parts of the series, but never really gone into; noone takes him to task for any of it.
Sirius trying to murder Snape while he was in high school (which is somehow forgiven by most readers--although Orson Scot Card said he could not accept Sirius as a good guy after that revelation).
I didn't even remember that, which shows how much attention it got.
What about Harry's bitchfest with Lupin about abandoning his kid.
Never went anywhere.
Oh, and don't get me started on the revelation through book 7 (and a little of book 6) that the Malfoys were not as evil as they seemed (they at least really loved their son, which, honestly, was unexpected on my part).
They're never really shown as good, just cowardly.
Harry tossing unforgiveable curses around like nobody's business,
But there are never any consequences.
To say the book was a clear black-vs-white tale is to discard a lot of the stories. It raises many issues about when is it acceptable to kill. I mean, holy shit. Harry fucking tortures people in this book.
But that's never actually taken up in the book.
You can find the moral issues if you dig, but in the book as written they're just not there.
At least, this is the case when geeks are talking about porn, MP3s, and TV shows... When we hear that the CIA is snooping on phone calls or Online-Mega-Mart is selling their customer database, then, quite suddenly, some of those bits are supposed to be less copyable than others.
No, people are supposed to use a little thing called ethics to decide which bits are reasonable to copy. Just like it's impossible to make a kitchen knife that can't kill people, but you should be reasonable about who you kill with one.
Wow, you need a clue. By applying filters for porn sites, they are not trying to stifle education about human sexuality.
Learn to read. He didn't say they were stopping the kids from learning about human sexuality, merely that the officials needed to learn some themselves. Yes, most porn is pure fantasy. But that is an important part of human sexuality.
Since C#/.net is very lame compared to the challenges of something like OpenMosix
Not at all. Writing everything in machine code may be more hardcore, but a high level language where you can just write what you actually mean rather than going through ten layers is more enjoyable and allows you to do a lot more.
Amarok looks quite horrible by compairson with what its UI is built on. Though they have their gnarly parts, on the whole I am always impressed with the KDE libraries.r
"Of course, their insistence that ground rhino horn will bring back a man's impotent tallywhacker....the jury's still out."
No, the jury's not in any sense out. It doesn't work. And therein lies the problem with traditional medical "knowledge" - for every valid remedy there are four which are pure codswallop.
To point out that while this may seem like a standardised format that anyone can use, in fact the standard is so useless that no-one but MS can handle the format, so that governments/etc. who want to standardise on an open format don't choose this one under the misapprehension that it's such a thing. Which matters if you want to be able to read the documents your government puts out.
And yet, in two responses now, you've said nothing that demonstrates that.
Again, you're wrong.
Please try to avoid non-sequiturs like this one, I NEVER ONCE SAID ANYTHING ABOUT PRIVACY
No, you asked me the difference between two situations, and the difference is that one is a violation of privacy and the other isn't. Am I supposed to explain this without mentioning privacy?
And what happens when your "private" information becomes available on the internet? Such as when some Best Buy employeee posts it? Oh right, your point falls apart.
Erm, not unless he has a time machine. It's still private when he posts it, and his posting it is still a violation of your privacy.
Slashdot Mirror
Bollocks. They won't open it because they want to continue to rake in money by being the only seller of major-label music for the ipod (yes, I know you can buy a cd and encode it yourself. Most people don't, and it's a lot more hassle)
The soundtrack doesn't have a load of adverts at the start before you can listen to it.
Because the consequences of not doing it are so bad. Hold this bare electrical wire, we're only 80% sure it's turned on.
Entirely possible, e.g. the previous one could have not allowed redistribution at all.
But aren't mechanical shocks more common for your typical computer? And won't these machines take far more damage from them than current solid-state ram?
Erm, the copyright statement itself; you just exercise your option ("at your option any later version") to distribute the program under the terms of the GPLv3.
The copyright holders for those GPLv2-only applications will add a special exception to their license, like was done for Qt back in the day. Or they'll move on and allow GPLv3. Either way it's not a big issue.
What has changed? What is the FSF doing differently from the way they were 2, 5, 20 years ago? All that's changed is the amount of FUD being chucked around.
I have better things to do then worry "Opps, shit did I link with something that requires I release the source".
And what is your magic way of avoiding this problem on other OSes, except by changing it into "Opps, shit did I link with something that requires I don't distribute at all"? Do tell.
Erm, what? They can write their own COPYING file giving people permission to distribute it under the GPLv3.
Not any shades of grey that get explored in the book - he's just a good guy.
the surprising turn of Draco,
Didn't happen in any way I saw; he just cared more about saving his own life than being evil.
the loss of Dumbledore as a faultless character,
Really jars with the other books; just isn't believable
Harry doing a lot of wrong shit through all 7 books
One of the better parts of the series, but never really gone into; noone takes him to task for any of it.
Sirius trying to murder Snape while he was in high school (which is somehow forgiven by most readers--although Orson Scot Card said he could not accept Sirius as a good guy after that revelation).
I didn't even remember that, which shows how much attention it got.
What about Harry's bitchfest with Lupin about abandoning his kid.
Never went anywhere.
Oh, and don't get me started on the revelation through book 7 (and a little of book 6) that the Malfoys were not as evil as they seemed (they at least really loved their son, which, honestly, was unexpected on my part).
They're never really shown as good, just cowardly.
Harry tossing unforgiveable curses around like nobody's business,
But there are never any consequences.
To say the book was a clear black-vs-white tale is to discard a lot of the stories. It raises many issues about when is it acceptable to kill. I mean, holy shit. Harry fucking tortures people in this book.
But that's never actually taken up in the book.
You can find the moral issues if you dig, but in the book as written they're just not there.
Since the filters won't work, it doesn't make any difference to the kids, and it means those officials don't object to the OLPC. Security theatre
No, people are supposed to use a little thing called ethics to decide which bits are reasonable to copy. Just like it's impossible to make a kitchen knife that can't kill people, but you should be reasonable about who you kill with one.
Learn to read. He didn't say they were stopping the kids from learning about human sexuality, merely that the officials needed to learn some themselves. Yes, most porn is pure fantasy. But that is an important part of human sexuality.
Bit note that likewise, this story is a warning that openmosix will be halting in 2008, not an immediate pulling the rug from under you.
Not at all. Writing everything in machine code may be more hardcore, but a high level language where you can just write what you actually mean rather than going through ten layers is more enjoyable and allows you to do a lot more.
Amarok looks quite horrible by compairson with what its UI is built on. Though they have their gnarly parts, on the whole I am always impressed with the KDE libraries.r
"Of course, their insistence that ground rhino horn will bring back a man's impotent tallywhacker....the jury's still out."
No, the jury's not in any sense out. It doesn't work. And therein lies the problem with traditional medical "knowledge" - for every valid remedy there are four which are pure codswallop.
Again, you insult because you can't respond.
Yes, I did. Go back and actually read my post.
*shrug*. That was all i was getting at.
To point out that while this may seem like a standardised format that anyone can use, in fact the standard is so useless that no-one but MS can handle the format, so that governments/etc. who want to standardise on an open format don't choose this one under the misapprehension that it's such a thing. Which matters if you want to be able to read the documents your government puts out.
As others pointed out, this could be very useful on shared hosting.
Yeah. A whole lotta confidence in your own sexuality I'm seeing there.
Yeah, insult me, that'll make up for your inability to respond to my argument. Oh, wait
Again, you're wrong.
Please try to avoid non-sequiturs like this one, I NEVER ONCE SAID ANYTHING ABOUT PRIVACY
No, you asked me the difference between two situations, and the difference is that one is a violation of privacy and the other isn't. Am I supposed to explain this without mentioning privacy?
And what happens when your "private" information becomes available on the internet? Such as when some Best Buy employeee posts it? Oh right, your point falls apart.
Erm, not unless he has a time machine. It's still private when he posts it, and his posting it is still a violation of your privacy.