Ethanol will not solve the problem. 100% of the US corn production will provide less than 2 weeks of liquid fuel. Next, ethanol from any source lives by the equation that 1 tonne of dry plant mass yields the equivalent of about 2 barrels of oil and this if we can do the conversion for free. This includes cellulostic ethanol.
It's also a net-negative energy fuel. The process of converting the corn to ethanol takes up more energy than the ethanol provides.
Indeed. I've flirted with the idea of moving to Canada, but doing so would require me to "bear allegiance to the Queen". Theoretically, anyone who is a citizen of a commonwealth realm or the UK is the property of the monarch.
Of course, since Democrats hate oil so much, you'd think it would be a good thing that oil is now going to be more expensive as well. This means more research into fuel efficiency as well as alternative fuel sources. Would you call this a Republican ideal?
Actually many prominent conservatives* are warming to the idea of a gas tax, Andrew Sullivan being one that comes to mind immediately.
I don't mind making gasoline expensive as hell, but for the fact that it's demand is incredibly inelastic. I'm from a relatively rural area. Changes in gas prices hurt these people more than the city-dweller who can simply jump on a train or take the bus, which, when I was in college, I enjoyed taking (but then it was only cheaper once gas was over $2.75, but I digress). When your job is 30+ miles away, you have to pay whatever the price is.
Of course, the answer to all this is a mass exodus from bedroom communities and back to living near one's job. Unfortunately, no one planned for expensive fuel. I think we're going to see it's implications come to full fruition by 2010.
*a bit of sleight of hand on my part. You specified Republicans, which don't completely overlap with conservatives.
Don't be obtuse. The BSDs use a single source tree to develop the OS; the kernel, the userspace tools, etc. are all developed together. It just so happens that they don't ship a GUI and with good reason. BSDs aren't really geared towards desktop operation.
If they want to do a desktop version, it's time for the kernel developers to branch out into standardising Desktop libraries, desktops (KDE vs Gnome), devices, packages
Yes, because desktop libraries, desktop environments, and packaging formats are something that the kernel developers need to worry about.
If you want an OS that isn't patched together from many different sources, try a BSD.
There were a few files where the person in question did hold the sole copyright to the file. In others, he held partial copyrights, and in yet other files, he held nothing.
From what I recall Theo et al. got upset with the last case. The person who relicensed the files was under the impression that they were all BSD or GPL, which was not the case. Theo went as far as saying that when a file is dual licensed as some of these were, and a user elects to use the GPL, stripping the BSD license out of the files was not only unethical but a violation of copyright.
This is easily proven to not be a copyright violation. If I choose the GPL (and indirectly reject the BSD license) I am only bound by the GPL. The GPL does not require me to keep BSD license statements, so I am free to delete them. Similarly, if I reject the GPL and accept the BSD license, I can ignore the GPL and delete any and all license statements referring to it.
The OP and I are mutual friends, so he knows I was not trying to paint him as anything. I just had a valid question I wanted answered. I would actually think he must at least have a single dev box to test new versions of his software.
I wonder if he lets his customers know that he doesn't run Windows himself. That is all.
I rejected Windows as a serious use platform for myself and my businesses because of the activation malware as of XP
And as far as I can tell WinImages runs on this non-serious platform. Perhaps you'd like to clear up why MS software isn't good enough for your business, but you still sell software that runs exclusively on it (that is, unless WinImages runs using Wine).
I'm not too much of a believer in the free market, but it's blindingly obvious that corporations don't actually pay any taxes. They just pass those costs on to consumers of their product. What would make more sense than taxing corporate profits is taxing dividends.
Sooner or later most corporations will pay dividends to their shareholders. This money is easily tracked and therefore easily taxed. This elimination of corporate income tax also has the side effect of treating corporations as non-person entities rather than the fictional persons they are under US law.
If Microsoft is a monopoly by virtue of its market share, why isn't Intel?
Because, AFAIK, Intel hasn't tried to use it's monopoly in processors (and I doubt that they have one) to get a monopoly in another area, say chipsets.
Under current law, you can have a monopoly so long as you don't use that monopoly to gain a monopoly to another market. Microsoft used their desktop OS monopoly to get a browser monopoly and then a media player monopoly.
If Bush decides to do that, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid can simply call a "pro forma" session to receive the nomination and then promptly adjourn. This tactic is designed to make Bush's appointee's get Senate clearance.
No it isn't. The "copyright text" (by which I assume you mean the statement that shows the file is copyrighted) is:
* Copyright (c) 2007 Jiri Slaby * All rights reserved.
In this case, the "ath5k_base.c" file, which the person who changed the license holds the copyright anyway. Let's look at each of the files, bearing in mind header files are not eligible for copyright.
"ath5k_base.c" -- copyright held by the person who changed the license (This is OK) "ath5k_base.h" -- not eligible for copyright (This is OK) "ath5k_hw.c" -- copyright jointly held by Slaby and Nick Kossifidis, assuming he granted the license change this is permissible, otherwise a copyright infringement (Grey area)* "ath5k_hw.h" -- not eligible for copyright (This is OK) "ath5k_regdom.c" -- copyright held by Reyk Floeter, assuming he granted the license change this is permissible, otherwise a copyright infringement (Grey area)*
When any file is dual licensed, you have to abide by one of the licenses. The BSD license requires you to not strip out the BSD license notice. The GPL requires a few more things. One of the things the GPL does not require is for you to keep the BSD license notice. The license notice is not part of the copyright notice anymore than the FBI warning on your CDs/DVDs is part of the copyright notice.
* Some/.ers seem to think all the code was dual licensed. It doesn't look that way from the copyright notices in the headers, but I've been wrong before.
WPA-PSK works fine on most rt2500 cards. The only problem is that rt2500 doesn't use wpasupplicant, but a combination of iwpriv and iwconfig to get things going. I find that it only works under WPA with TKIP encryption. These "legacy" drivers are working rather well for most users.
There is a project to rewrite the driver from scratch, get it mainlined in the kernel, and use the standard interfaces so that the card can be used with NetworkManager and the like. Unfortunately, for all their work they haven't much to show for it. They've changed 802.11 stacks several times, the drivers are still very, very buggy, etc. Hopefully their temporary hiatus will give them a fresh perspective when they tackle completing the new drivers.
If you are interested in emailing me, I might be able to help you. I've had an rt2500 card for 2+ years, and I've ran into about every problem they have.
You also seem to be in the same boat a lot of people moving to GNU/Linux are. Things are rocky until you make the commitment to buying hardware that is well supported. I had a lot of the same problems, but now I wouldn't go back to Windows if you paid me.
Part of being a monopoly means not having to give a shit about what your customers think. I don't think they've cared since W2K was released and even with Vista tanking, I don't see this changing anytime soon.
In fact, even if you just point out where people can get my work, say by putting a tracker on a Bittorrent site, or giving someone a voucher which lets them download it, you still need my permission.
I don't think that theory has been tested in a US court of law. I'd like the FSF to take down MSFT, but I'd like them to do it in a way that doesn't pervert copyright law in the direction most of us have been fighting against.
Slashdot Mirror
The privilege of the writ of habeas corpus shall not be suspended, unless when in cases of rebellion or invasion the public safety may require it.
It was likely named as a privilege since the founders knew that rights cannot be suspended or otherwise infringed upon for any reason.
Indeed. I've flirted with the idea of moving to Canada, but doing so would require me to "bear allegiance to the Queen". Theoretically, anyone who is a citizen of a commonwealth realm or the UK is the property of the monarch.
No thanks.
I don't mind making gasoline expensive as hell, but for the fact that it's demand is incredibly inelastic. I'm from a relatively rural area. Changes in gas prices hurt these people more than the city-dweller who can simply jump on a train or take the bus, which, when I was in college, I enjoyed taking (but then it was only cheaper once gas was over $2.75, but I digress). When your job is 30+ miles away, you have to pay whatever the price is.
Of course, the answer to all this is a mass exodus from bedroom communities and back to living near one's job. Unfortunately, no one planned for expensive fuel. I think we're going to see it's implications come to full fruition by 2010.
*a bit of sleight of hand on my part. You specified Republicans, which don't completely overlap with conservatives.
Don't be obtuse. The BSDs use a single source tree to develop the OS; the kernel, the userspace tools, etc. are all developed together. It just so happens that they don't ship a GUI and with good reason. BSDs aren't really geared towards desktop operation.
If you want an OS that isn't patched together from many different sources, try a BSD.
Damn this new mod system!
This is to undo the "redundant" mod I accidentally gave you.
The way I look at it is:
Stable = servers
Testing = desktops
Sid/unstable is good if you don't mind having to fix things when they break, but that doesn't happen that much.
I track testing on my main PC. Security updates are slow, but the testing security team is working diligently on fixing that.
There were a few files where the person in question did hold the sole copyright to the file. In others, he held partial copyrights, and in yet other files, he held nothing.
From what I recall Theo et al. got upset with the last case. The person who relicensed the files was under the impression that they were all BSD or GPL, which was not the case. Theo went as far as saying that when a file is dual licensed as some of these were, and a user elects to use the GPL, stripping the BSD license out of the files was not only unethical but a violation of copyright.
This is easily proven to not be a copyright violation. If I choose the GPL (and indirectly reject the BSD license) I am only bound by the GPL. The GPL does not require me to keep BSD license statements, so I am free to delete them. Similarly, if I reject the GPL and accept the BSD license, I can ignore the GPL and delete any and all license statements referring to it.
The OP and I are mutual friends, so he knows I was not trying to paint him as anything. I just had a valid question I wanted answered. I would actually think he must at least have a single dev box to test new versions of his software.
I wonder if he lets his customers know that he doesn't run Windows himself. That is all.
9/11 is a public holiday. It is Patriot Day.
Don't forget the often forgot #9, which essentially states:
Just because we singled out some rights in the previous amendments, that doesn't mean those are the only ones you have.
I'm not too much of a believer in the free market, but it's blindingly obvious that corporations don't actually pay any taxes. They just pass those costs on to consumers of their product. What would make more sense than taxing corporate profits is taxing dividends.
Sooner or later most corporations will pay dividends to their shareholders. This money is easily tracked and therefore easily taxed. This elimination of corporate income tax also has the side effect of treating corporations as non-person entities rather than the fictional persons they are under US law.
Under current law, you can have a monopoly so long as you don't use that monopoly to gain a monopoly to another market. Microsoft used their desktop OS monopoly to get a browser monopoly and then a media player monopoly.
If Bush decides to do that, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid can simply call a "pro forma" session to receive the nomination and then promptly adjourn. This tactic is designed to make Bush's appointee's get Senate clearance.
* Copyright (c) 2007 Jiri Slaby
* All rights reserved.
In this case, the "ath5k_base.c" file, which the person who changed the license holds the copyright anyway. Let's look at each of the files, bearing in mind header files are not eligible for copyright.
"ath5k_base.c" -- copyright held by the person who changed the license (This is OK)
"ath5k_base.h" -- not eligible for copyright (This is OK)
"ath5k_hw.c" -- copyright jointly held by Slaby and Nick Kossifidis, assuming he granted the license change this is permissible, otherwise a copyright infringement (Grey area)*
"ath5k_hw.h" -- not eligible for copyright (This is OK)
"ath5k_regdom.c" -- copyright held by Reyk Floeter, assuming he granted the license change this is permissible, otherwise a copyright infringement (Grey area)*
When any file is dual licensed, you have to abide by one of the licenses. The BSD license requires you to not strip out the BSD license notice. The GPL requires a few more things. One of the things the GPL does not require is for you to keep the BSD license notice. The license notice is not part of the copyright notice anymore than the FBI warning on your CDs/DVDs is part of the copyright notice.
* Some
WPA-PSK works fine on most rt2500 cards. The only problem is that rt2500 doesn't use wpasupplicant, but a combination of iwpriv and iwconfig to get things going. I find that it only works under WPA with TKIP encryption. These "legacy" drivers are working rather well for most users.
There is a project to rewrite the driver from scratch, get it mainlined in the kernel, and use the standard interfaces so that the card can be used with NetworkManager and the like. Unfortunately, for all their work they haven't much to show for it. They've changed 802.11 stacks several times, the drivers are still very, very buggy, etc. Hopefully their temporary hiatus will give them a fresh perspective when they tackle completing the new drivers.
If you are interested in emailing me, I might be able to help you. I've had an rt2500 card for 2+ years, and I've ran into about every problem they have.
You also seem to be in the same boat a lot of people moving to GNU/Linux are. Things are rocky until you make the commitment to buying hardware that is well supported. I had a lot of the same problems, but now I wouldn't go back to Windows if you paid me.
You're off my enemies list for that one.
Better yet, try clive.
Part of being a monopoly means not having to give a shit about what your customers think. I don't think they've cared since W2K was released and even with Vista tanking, I don't see this changing anytime soon.
That isn't precedent (yet), and it's a pretty obviously wrong decision written by someone who has no clue how computing systems work.