But P2P isn't inherently illegal. You may well argue that the majority of P2P traffic is of copyrighted material which the recipient isn't legally entitled to download.
I may, or may not, agree that this probably the case. However, you are automatically labeling all P2P as illegal.
What restrictions? I said that the GPLv2 does not prevent further distribution, ie does not impose further restrictions - your comprehension skills suck.
Except that section 3b of GPL v2 says that the source code needs to made available to those for whom you make available copies of your work.
Nowhere does it say that you have to make copies of your work available for everybody, neither does it say that you have to make the source available to everybody.
What it does do is prevent anybody who already has copies of the work (obtained by legal/lawful means), and/or the source code, making it available to others.
But how can the browser just use whatever codecs are installed on the local machine?
The choice of codec is determined by the media format, which is determined by a third party, remotely. By using HTML5 standards the provider is at least encouraged to provide media in a format which will be accessible to the majority of internet users.
You'd be surprised how many web-sites turn out not to be "state-operated" and thus still have documents only available in proprietary formats though. This also doesn't cover documents made available via other means (such as e-mail).
I have it on good authority that eventually all documents, including other media such as audio and video, will be required to be in open formats.
The free drivers work well for me with compiz, I don't have a great need for 3D acceleration which is where other people have voiced their dissatisfaction with the free driver.
The flickering in various media players is still an issue - apparently this is a bug in X which the nvidia driver works around somehow, although I can't remember where I read this.
All in all, for me, I'm now glad I made the decision to buy the ATI card over the Nvidia, YMMV.
Ah, but trespass is a tort, not a criminal offence (which is why all "trespassers will be prosecuted" signs can safely be ignored).
OTOH "Trespassers will be shot and fed to the dogs" signs should ALWAYS be heeded.
How are ALL these images being made illegal? The images are clearly not pornographic as defined by the legislation.
An image is "pornographic" if it is of such a nature that it must reasonably be assumed to have been produced solely or principally for the purpose of sexual arousal
The law is clearly stupid, another law where possession of an image of act may be illegal, where performance of the act itself is not - but it's not outlawing medical texts.
He just suggested that all the extra stuff not be compiled into the kernel. Do you need drivers for webcam, printer and scanner before you've started your desktop? No, so build them as modules, the kernel can load them later when required.
Who are these nameless idiots anyway? "A home office spokesman", doesn't (s)he have a name?
Excellent point. I've long believed that those actually responsible for making the laws, rules and regulations by which we have to abide should be named in the documents they produce.
We ought to be able to point the finger at an individual (or group of individuals) and say "so you're responsible for this fuck-up, now what're you going to do to fix it?".
If you don't have the balls to stand by the decisions you make, which are then enforced upon others, then you shouldn't be doing the job.
With the appropriate permissions set on the server there's no reason why ftp can't be used as a valid method of sending information and uploading files.
A username/password pair on the screen helps a little to prevent automated abuse of the system, although it's still essentially anonymous ftp upload.
If the ticket is upheld, you pay: $12.50 (deposit) + $25.00 (ticket) = $37.50
You receive: $12.50 (refund) + $2.50 (10% of ticket) = $15.00
Net paid: $37.50 - $15.00 = $22.50
Savings = $2.50
If the ticket is upheld, you pay: $12.50 (deposit) + $25.00 (ticket) = $37.50
You receive: $12.50 (refund) + $10.00 = $22.50
Net paid: $37.50 - $22.50 = $15.00
Savings = $10.00
Which, strangely enough, is the same amount as... if all steps are followed and the ticket is still not dismissed they will pay $10 towards your ticket
Slashdot Mirror
But P2P isn't inherently illegal. You may well argue that the majority of P2P traffic is of copyrighted material which the recipient isn't legally entitled to download.
I may, or may not, agree that this probably the case. However, you are automatically labeling all P2P as illegal.
What restrictions? I said that the GPLv2 does not prevent further distribution, ie does not impose further restrictions - your comprehension skills suck.
Except that section 3b of GPL v2 says that the source code needs to made available to those for whom you make available copies of your work.
Nowhere does it say that you have to make copies of your work available for everybody, neither does it say that you have to make the source available to everybody.
What it does do is prevent anybody who already has copies of the work (obtained by legal/lawful means), and/or the source code, making it available to others.
But how can the browser just use whatever codecs are installed on the local machine?
The choice of codec is determined by the media format, which is determined by a third party, remotely. By using HTML5 standards the provider is at least encouraged to provide media in a format which will be accessible to the majority of internet users.
And just who will that inconvenience?
and most importantly, how do I create empty lines with HTML enabled?
like<br>
<br>
this
Norway have made a start, requiring documents on government web-sites be available in open standards formats.
http://www.regjeringen.no/en/dep/fad/press-centre/press-releases/2007/open-document-standards-to-be-obligatory.html?id=494810
You'd be surprised how many web-sites turn out not to be "state-operated" and thus still have documents only available in proprietary formats though. This also doesn't cover documents made available via other means (such as e-mail).
I have it on good authority that eventually all documents, including other media such as audio and video, will be required to be in open formats.
How big's an int then?
It doesn't make you unscrew the first screw if you want to screw in a fourth though.
More accurate news at his website
Blimey, that was cheap, think I'll have my accounts done again!
The free drivers work well for me with compiz, I don't have a great need for 3D acceleration which is where other people have voiced their dissatisfaction with the free driver.
The flickering in various media players is still an issue - apparently this is a bug in X which the nvidia driver works around somehow, although I can't remember where I read this.
All in all, for me, I'm now glad I made the decision to buy the ATI card over the Nvidia, YMMV.
The missing quit option is by design - look in the user-switcher menu. (I think it's stupid too.)
I'm running 64-bits with an ATI card, works for me.
Ah, but trespass is a tort, not a criminal offence (which is why all "trespassers will be prosecuted" signs can safely be ignored).
OTOH "Trespassers will be shot and fed to the dogs" signs should ALWAYS be heeded.
We could always build them with OFF switches as well.
An image is "pornographic" if it is of such a nature that it must reasonably be assumed to have been produced solely or principally for the purpose of sexual arousal
The law is clearly stupid, another law where possession of an image of act may be illegal, where performance of the act itself is not - but it's not outlawing medical texts.
He just suggested that all the extra stuff not be compiled into the kernel. Do you need drivers for webcam, printer and scanner before you've started your desktop? No, so build them as modules, the kernel can load them later when required.
You'll have to force https, almost every link I looked at reverted back to http.
Who are these nameless idiots anyway? "A home office spokesman", doesn't (s)he have a name?
Excellent point. I've long believed that those actually responsible for making the laws, rules and regulations by which we have to abide should be named in the documents they produce.
We ought to be able to point the finger at an individual (or group of individuals) and say "so you're responsible for this fuck-up, now what're you going to do to fix it?".
If you don't have the balls to stand by the decisions you make, which are then enforced upon others, then you shouldn't be doing the job.
race conditions are solely a problem with multithreaded applications.
No they're not. They're a problem when a single resource is to be used by multiple consumers.
Wikipedia explains it quite nicely.
Isn't the defendant under oath if they take the stand?
Or allow access to all registered users, but only allow "local" access to the signup page.
With the appropriate permissions set on the server there's no reason why ftp can't be used as a valid method of sending information and uploading files.
A username/password pair on the screen helps a little to prevent automated abuse of the system, although it's still essentially anonymous ftp upload.
If the ticket is upheld, you pay: $12.50 (deposit) + $25.00 (ticket) = $37.50
You receive: $12.50 (refund) + $2.50 (10% of ticket) = $15.00
Net paid: $37.50 - $15.00 = $22.50
Savings = $2.50
If the ticket is upheld, you pay: $12.50 (deposit) + $25.00 (ticket) = $37.50
... if all steps are followed and the ticket is still not dismissed they will pay $10 towards your ticket
You receive: $12.50 (refund) + $10.00 = $22.50
Net paid: $37.50 - $22.50 = $15.00
Savings = $10.00
Which, strangely enough, is the same amount as