Do you really want to trust the health of all of us to the organization which has brought us the thriftiness of the Pentagon, the respect-for-rights of the FBI, the public transparancy of the CIA, the timely delivery of the U.S. Postal Service, and the warm human compassion of HUD?
So a license that allows people to modify source code of a program isn't modifiable.
How is this a bad thing? If the license itself could be modified, wouldn't it destroy the purpose of having the license?
If the GPL could be modified at will, it would be preempted by companies like Microsoft and IBM who would steal every new innovation that came out and redistribute it under a restrictive license.
Even worse, companies could modify the GPL itself so that it favored them...
I don't mind, as long as employers are upfront about it when they hire you. They should have the right to set the terms of your employment.
The only thing is that most employment agreements are like the EULAs that pop up before software installs, something you glance over but don't read in detail. This makes it easy to hide an unacceptable restriction in small print.
Yeah, but now you're going to get the n00bs who can't remember their passcodes writing it (the passcode) on sticky notes or whatnot. Except, instead of just losing a single credit card, those n00bs will lose their one and only identification system.
Ah, but this is where the hardware component comes in...
If you plug in a new keyboard (or, for that matter, any new hardware) the system should recognize the TCPA chip on the new component and ask for some sort of verification (e.g. secure USB key) before it allows the new hardware to function.
Though I really don't know how this would work if you got a new processor, RAM, motherboard, or some other "core" component...
Maybe he was worried about XP Tablet PC edition crashing on him like XP Media Center did during E3, and, of course, Windows 98 famously crashing during the widely publicized tech. demo.
After you get burned 3 times, it sorta starts to sting, y'know...
The best case scenario is that these weapons never existed. In that case, the only thing the Administration is guilty of is lying.
The worst case scenario is that these weapons did exist, but have since "disappeared". In this case, the Administration is guilty of the same crime that the accused Saddam of... i.e. allowing terrorists to obtain weapons of mass destruction.
Are kids learning java/perl/python like we learned basic/fortran?
If the kids are in AP Computer Science, they are learning Java, if they had the course this year or last year, or C++ if they had the course before last year (e.g. 2 years ago). However, like with FORTRAN, most of these kids are not writing good code as the instructor usually does not ever really go through the source code, but just looks at the program output. The philosophy is that, if the program works, who cares what kind of dirty tricks were used to make it.
My first exposure to good code was really when I got a job as a web-developer and had to go through some Perl scripts written by an old-time programmer.
outside powers interested in making sure the USA doesn't succeed,
I've been hearing this over and over from the Administration and am just getting sick and tired of it...
Who are these outside powers? Why don't we name them if we know who they are? If we don't know (or at least suspect) who they are, then how are we sure that outside powers are involved in the first place?
Also, I doubt very seriously that Iraq approached us, and said "Hey, we'd like to make some biological weapons so we can really stick it to the Iranians, with whom we are at war. Waddya say?"
Actually, that's almost exactly what happened...
Iraq approached the US about acquiring weapons, conventional, biological, and chemical so that it could finish off Iran, whom we were also opposed to (due to the whole Islamic revolution deal). The US agreed, and we sent Donald Rumsfeld over to consumate the deal.
Monoplies *BREAK* the supply/demand curve and are able to set their prices arbitrarily
No...
Monopolies cannot set prices arbitrarily. For example, if Microsoft sets prices for its OS at, say, $1 million per copy, most people would use Linux, risk the legal costs of piracy or choose to go without computers, rather than pay so much for Windows. In any case, Microsoft would no longer make a profit and would go out of business.
A monopoly produces and prices according to it's production possiblities curve
A monopoly sells until marginal revenue equals marginal cost. Since the marginal revenue curve declines at 2x demand, a monopoly will always sell less product at higher prices than a competitive market.
Getting a bit warmer is a lot better than getting a bit cooler.
While I agree with much of what you have to say, I disagree with this.
We simply don't have enough data to predict what sort of havoc climate changes are going to wreak. Getting colder may cause an ice age, or, it may slow desertification, increasing the quantity of arable land. Warming may open up currently non-arable tundra, but the gains may be offset by shifts in rain patterns or increases in deserts. We simply don't know enough to even try to predict the consequences.
If Linus is the only person that can change a specific part of the kernel, what good does notifying the world instead of just him do?
First of all, Linus isn't the only one who can chance the kernel.
Second, by notifying everyone of the problem, you increase awareness and allow people to get temporary defenses up so that the don't get 0wned by (what appears to them as) a zero-day attack, which could possibly occur if a cracker independently discovers the vulnerability.
After all, if the vulnerability was found by one person, it could be found by another.
Unless you want to maximize the number of songs you can get on the.mp3 player, there's no reason *not* to use lossless, what with the low cost of storage nowadays.
Slashdot Mirror
But from where did Saddam get his WMDs?
Is it possible that we gave him the weapons?
Do you really want to trust the health of all of us to the organization which has brought us the thriftiness of the Pentagon, the respect-for-rights of the FBI, the public transparancy of the CIA, the timely delivery of the U.S. Postal Service, and the warm human compassion of HUD?
Lets not forget the security of DHS...
So a license that allows people to modify source code of a program isn't modifiable.
How is this a bad thing? If the license itself could be modified, wouldn't it destroy the purpose of having the license?
If the GPL could be modified at will, it would be preempted by companies like Microsoft and IBM who would steal every new innovation that came out and redistribute it under a restrictive license.
Even worse, companies could modify the GPL itself so that it favored them...
It says on the website that this guy slugs Hitler 3 times in 1 comic...
Is there any way I can get my hands on this particular series, or is it out of print?
I don't mind, as long as employers are upfront about it when they hire you. They should have the right to set the terms of your employment.
The only thing is that most employment agreements are like the EULAs that pop up before software installs, something you glance over but don't read in detail. This makes it easy to hide an unacceptable restriction in small print.
Digging to another cell with a bayonet?
This guy is like the Canadian MacGyver...
Yeah, but now you're going to get the n00bs who can't remember their passcodes writing it (the passcode) on sticky notes or whatnot. Except, instead of just losing a single credit card, those n00bs will lose their one and only identification system.
Ah, but this is where the hardware component comes in...
If you plug in a new keyboard (or, for that matter, any new hardware) the system should recognize the TCPA chip on the new component and ask for some sort of verification (e.g. secure USB key) before it allows the new hardware to function.
Though I really don't know how this would work if you got a new processor, RAM, motherboard, or some other "core" component...
More like a George Orwell reference...
Yes, I know my 'crypto tools' are lame doodlings
:-)
Don't worry, so are Bill Gates
Maybe he was worried about XP Tablet PC edition crashing on him like XP Media Center did during E3, and, of course, Windows 98 famously crashing during the widely publicized tech. demo.
After you get burned 3 times, it sorta starts to sting, y'know...
The best case scenario is that these weapons never existed. In that case, the only thing the Administration is guilty of is lying.
The worst case scenario is that these weapons did exist, but have since "disappeared". In this case, the Administration is guilty of the same crime that the accused Saddam of... i.e. allowing terrorists to obtain weapons of mass destruction.
Then where are said WMD's?
America's own weapons inspectors, who went to Iraq after the war, said the weapons aren't there.
Do you remember the address of said site? I could use some improvement in my handwriting as well.
Are kids learning java/perl/python like we learned basic/fortran?
If the kids are in AP Computer Science, they are learning Java, if they had the course this year or last year, or C++ if they had the course before last year (e.g. 2 years ago). However, like with FORTRAN, most of these kids are not writing good code as the instructor usually does not ever really go through the source code, but just looks at the program output. The philosophy is that, if the program works, who cares what kind of dirty tricks were used to make it.
My first exposure to good code was really when I got a job as a web-developer and had to go through some Perl scripts written by an old-time programmer.
Holy crap, I thought I was making an original comment...
BTW, where is this new naming scheme? Has it been scrapped? I've certainly never seen/heard of this before...
Pentium 525. Dunno why, but it just sounds right.
So, are Pentiums like BMWs now?
outside powers interested in making sure the USA doesn't succeed,
I've been hearing this over and over from the Administration and am just getting sick and tired of it...
Who are these outside powers? Why don't we name them if we know who they are? If we don't know (or at least suspect) who they are, then how are we sure that outside powers are involved in the first place?
Also, I doubt very seriously that Iraq approached us, and said "Hey, we'd like to make some biological weapons so we can really stick it to the Iranians, with whom we are at war. Waddya say?"
Actually, that's almost exactly what happened...
Iraq approached the US about acquiring weapons, conventional, biological, and chemical so that it could finish off Iran, whom we were also opposed to (due to the whole Islamic revolution deal). The US agreed, and we sent Donald Rumsfeld over to consumate the deal.
More information
In Soviet Russia,
Camera blurs You!!!
Monoplies *BREAK* the supply/demand curve and are able to set their prices arbitrarily
No...
Monopolies cannot set prices arbitrarily. For example, if Microsoft sets prices for its OS at, say, $1 million per copy, most people would use Linux, risk the legal costs of piracy or choose to go without computers, rather than pay so much for Windows. In any case, Microsoft would no longer make a profit and would go out of business.
A monopoly produces and prices according to it's production possiblities curve
A monopoly sells until marginal revenue equals marginal cost. Since the marginal revenue curve declines at 2x demand, a monopoly will always sell less product at higher prices than a competitive market.
Getting a bit warmer is a lot better than getting a bit cooler.
While I agree with much of what you have to say, I disagree with this.
We simply don't have enough data to predict what sort of havoc climate changes are going to wreak. Getting colder may cause an ice age, or, it may slow desertification, increasing the quantity of arable land. Warming may open up currently non-arable tundra, but the gains may be offset by shifts in rain patterns or increases in deserts. We simply don't know enough to even try to predict the consequences.
If Linus is the only person that can change a specific part of the kernel, what good does notifying the world instead of just him do?
First of all, Linus isn't the only one who can chance the kernel.
Second, by notifying everyone of the problem, you increase awareness and allow people to get temporary defenses up so that the don't get 0wned by (what appears to them as) a zero-day attack, which could possibly occur if a cracker independently discovers the vulnerability.
After all, if the vulnerability was found by one person, it could be found by another.
Unless you want to maximize the number of songs you can get on the .mp3 player, there's no reason *not* to use lossless, what with the low cost of storage nowadays.