According to Thomas Gleixner, the future of the realtime patchset to Linux is in doubt [1], as it is difficult to secure funding from interested parties on this functionality even though it is both useful and important:
What are your thoughts on this, and what do you think we need to do to get more support behind the RT patchset, especially considering Linux's increasing use in embedded systems where realtime functionality is undoubtedly useful.
Attribution-Noncommercial-NoDerivitives will do the trick. I question the need for heavy-handed control mechanisms such as embedded players. I suppose they want to guarantee attribution and a link back to them, but people who are intent to steal their images are going to do it anyway.
Spoilers abound, so stop reading if you haven't seen it yet.
----
The beginning of the movie started promisingly enough. Okay, over the top action sequence on Krypton, but I liked Russell Crowe's Badass Jor-El. Moving on to Superman's beginnings on Earth, the introspective moments and the slowing pace helps. Then finally Clark becomes Superman, and then... shit explodes everywhere. Superman seems completely unconcerned about the tens of thousands of people that are dying from his battle with Zod. In the Christopher Reeve movie with Terence Stamp as Zod, Superman had the sense to draw the bad Kryptonians away to the North Pole. Here, pft, he just doesn't care.
Also, this is the first time the people of earth has seen Superman. They have no reason at all to trust him, especially not the military (since they were playing that angle). There were no character-establishing moments where Superman doesn't just save the president, he also pulls kittens from trees (see Superman: The Movie).
Finally, didn't Superman practically lead the army to his mom's house where his spaceship was hidden? Didn't they figure out his identity already from there?
Frankly I'm tired of huge flaming spectacles with no substance to them. ALIENS! BIG BATTLE IN THE CITY! SPACESHIPS! SUPER-POWERED BEINGS! That describes every final act of most major tentpole summer movies I've seen in recent years - Transformers, Avengers, even Star Trek. Now this.
Imagine that, the ability to text to the past. We could get warnings about impending events!
New Text Message From Marty McFly:
I HV TO TELL U ABT TEH FUTURE
Reply from Doc Brown:
WHAT?
New Text Message From Marty McFly
ON THE NIGHT YOU GO BACK, YOU GET SH*message text missing*
Microsoft's approach to security is like putting too much air into a balloon! And when exploiters find a way around their measures, it's like.. a balloon, and... something bad happens!
...of this technological terror you've constructed. The ability to generate a 1 kilojoule per 1 picosecond pulse is insignificant, next to the power of a good Slashdotting.
"I have code that I've written for my current company that I'd like to open-source. The only problem is that my company has the usual clause that says that anything I write belongs to them.
If you wrote it for them, it's not usual that it belongs to them, is it?
I guess it was a time when the space race was still on, and space exploration was the cool thing in the hearts and minds of the public. Oh those lovely space sets...
I wish they still made 'em like they used to. I still have my all my old Lego, and I wish I had more parts from the Space set. I seem to have an overabundance of red bricks (I wonder if that's common for everyone?).
"Some manufacturers have voiced concerns that the requirement could leave important security or copyright protection features in their products open to tampering"
Uh, that's the very idea of the GPL. It lets people who bought the product use it in any way they see fit, which includes "tamnpering" with it. It even allows you to redistribute it. The only thing it prevents is redistribution under a different license without permission. Didn't anyone give McAfee the memo?
As pointed out by previous posters, Google is an advertising company and thus isn't really in competition with Microsoft for business. However, they do have software products and OSS projects funded by their advertising revenue which in turn competes with Microsoft. Therefore Microsoft isn't a threat to Google, but Google is a threat to Microsoft.
Google alone won't "kill" Microsoft, but perhaps a combination of Google + Linux/OSS + other Unixes + alternative user platforms such as Apple will be enough to make Microsoft impotent. That, is the victory I'd like to see. Microsoft being irrelevant, and as easily ignored as if it didn't exist.
Netrek 2006, for example, has a BSD/MIT style license that says "Do what thou wilt except re-license under a (L)GPL or similarly viral license". The author of that license specifically identifies GPL as reducing the freedoms of the developer, which to be fair I'm inclined to agree with.
So, what the author of the license is basically saying is, it's even okay if you re-license the BSD code under an anally-restrictive proprietary license which allows that restrict every kind of freedom for everyone (users and developers included), just as long a those dirty, dirty GNU/hippies don't share the code their way. Because... it's... restrictive sharing in a way that we snobbishly disapprove of! Yeah. Because no sharing at all is better than GPL-style sharing.
If this were true we'd already be inundated with DeLoreans now, coming back in time to visit the momentous occassion when they decided to make them again.
Microsoft's tactics in providing "patent agreements" remind me of the SCO days when they made an assumption that Linux "belongs" to them because of some vague "infringements". Based on this assumption, they start doing wonky things like charging $699 per seat for the right to use Linux, and other such nonsense.
MS is operating along the same lines. The assumption is that you owe Microsoft something for using Linux, hence the need for such agreements between MS and Linux vendors.
It's classic FUD, but I don't know if MS would actually sue anyone. Unlike SCO Microsoft has a bottomless pit of money, and yet MS may not be large enough to successfully try and destroy Linux via patent infringement lawsuits.
We'll see how it all plays out. Will Microsoft embarass themselves the same way SCO did? One thing's for sure, if Microsoft decides to play the patent game, they too are at risk of getting countersued for whatever patents they infringe (and based on how many software patents are out there, there's sure to be some).
Slashdot Mirror
According to Thomas Gleixner, the future of the realtime patchset to Linux is in doubt [1], as it is difficult to secure funding from interested parties on this functionality even though it is both useful and important:
What are your thoughts on this, and what do you think we need to do to get more support behind the RT patchset, especially considering Linux's increasing use in embedded systems where realtime functionality is undoubtedly useful.
[1] https://lwn.net/Articles/604695/
Attribution-Noncommercial-NoDerivitives will do the trick. I question the need for heavy-handed control mechanisms such as embedded players. I suppose they want to guarantee attribution and a link back to them, but people who are intent to steal their images are going to do it anyway.
Robots cutting weeds. Weeds evolving immunity to being cut. This is what leads to.... ...ROBOTS VERSUS MEGAWEEDS!
A new SyFy original movie.
I'm using it to learn about ARM, and write baremetal code for it. Maybe it'll morph into a little OS. It's lots of fun. Anyone else doing this?
Hi,
What prompted the move from Google to Dropbox? What did you do at Google, and what are you going to do at Dropbox?
Spoilers abound, so stop reading if you haven't seen it yet.
----
The beginning of the movie started promisingly enough. Okay, over the top action sequence on Krypton, but I liked Russell Crowe's Badass Jor-El. Moving on to Superman's beginnings on Earth, the introspective moments and the slowing pace helps. Then finally Clark becomes Superman, and then... shit explodes everywhere. Superman seems completely unconcerned about the tens of thousands of people that are dying from his battle with Zod. In the Christopher Reeve movie with Terence Stamp as Zod, Superman had the sense to draw the bad Kryptonians away to the North Pole. Here, pft, he just doesn't care.
Also, this is the first time the people of earth has seen Superman. They have no reason at all to trust him, especially not the military (since they were playing that angle). There were no character-establishing moments where Superman doesn't just save the president, he also pulls kittens from trees (see Superman: The Movie).
Finally, didn't Superman practically lead the army to his mom's house where his spaceship was hidden? Didn't they figure out his identity already from there?
Frankly I'm tired of huge flaming spectacles with no substance to them. ALIENS! BIG BATTLE IN THE CITY! SPACESHIPS! SUPER-POWERED BEINGS! That describes every final act of most major tentpole summer movies I've seen in recent years - Transformers, Avengers, even Star Trek. Now this.
Sigh.
In an ideal world, we would be able to eliminate CO2 from our atmosphere completely
Plants need CO2 to produce food. If you eliminated CO2 we'd die as a species, along with every other species.
After all, Microsoft does own England.
Imagine that, the ability to text to the past. We could get warnings about impending events! New Text Message From Marty McFly: I HV TO TELL U ABT TEH FUTURE Reply from Doc Brown: WHAT? New Text Message From Marty McFly ON THE NIGHT YOU GO BACK, YOU GET SH*message text missing*
Rickrolling is so 2009.
Microsoft's approach to security is like putting too much air into a balloon! And when exploiters find a way around their measures, it's like.. a balloon, and... something bad happens!
This prescient Slashdotter predicted it all the way back in February 2007! Slashdot confirms it, Whiney Mac Fanboys can predict the future.
...of this technological terror you've constructed. The ability to generate a 1 kilojoule per 1 picosecond pulse is insignificant, next to the power of a good Slashdotting.
Now please explain the hefty price tag for your unfinished product.
I've found that a suitable poster boy for Chaotic Neutral is Dr. Gregory House.
Systems programmers worth their salt can at least read assembler output. It's a valuable skill when debugging kernel errors.
I guess it was a time when the space race was still on, and space exploration was the cool thing in the hearts and minds of the public. Oh those lovely space sets...
I wish they still made 'em like they used to. I still have my all my old Lego, and I wish I had more parts from the Space set. I seem to have an overabundance of red bricks (I wonder if that's common for everyone?).
"Some manufacturers have voiced concerns that the requirement could leave important security or copyright protection features in their products open to tampering"
Uh, that's the very idea of the GPL. It lets people who bought the product use it in any way they see fit, which includes "tamnpering" with it. It even allows you to redistribute it. The only thing it prevents is redistribution under a different license without permission. Didn't anyone give McAfee the memo?
As pointed out by previous posters, Google is an advertising company and thus isn't really in competition with Microsoft for business. However, they do have software products and OSS projects funded by their advertising revenue which in turn competes with Microsoft. Therefore Microsoft isn't a threat to Google, but Google is a threat to Microsoft.
Google alone won't "kill" Microsoft, but perhaps a combination of Google + Linux/OSS + other Unixes + alternative user platforms such as Apple will be enough to make Microsoft impotent. That, is the victory I'd like to see. Microsoft being irrelevant, and as easily ignored as if it didn't exist.
This is interesting.
Spielberg, Lucas and Coppola were known as "the three amigos" right? Could there be a connection?
Netrek 2006, for example, has a BSD/MIT style license that says "Do what thou wilt except re-license under a (L)GPL or similarly viral license". The author of that license specifically identifies GPL as reducing the freedoms of the developer, which to be fair I'm inclined to agree with. So, what the author of the license is basically saying is, it's even okay if you re-license the BSD code under an anally-restrictive proprietary license which allows that restrict every kind of freedom for everyone (users and developers included), just as long a those dirty, dirty GNU/hippies don't share the code their way. Because... it's... restrictive sharing in a way that we snobbishly disapprove of! Yeah. Because no sharing at all is better than GPL-style sharing.
If this were true we'd already be inundated with DeLoreans now, coming back in time to visit the momentous occassion when they decided to make them again.
One point twenty one gigawatts!
Wikiality bites.
So says Stephen Colbert.
Britannica should also check its facts about elephant populations. I heard it has tripled.
Microsoft's tactics in providing "patent agreements" remind me of the SCO days when they made an assumption that Linux "belongs" to them because of some vague "infringements". Based on this assumption, they start doing wonky things like charging $699 per seat for the right to use Linux, and other such nonsense.
MS is operating along the same lines. The assumption is that you owe Microsoft something for using Linux, hence the need for such agreements between MS and Linux vendors.
It's classic FUD, but I don't know if MS would actually sue anyone. Unlike SCO Microsoft has a bottomless pit of money, and yet MS may not be large enough to successfully try and destroy Linux via patent infringement lawsuits.
We'll see how it all plays out. Will Microsoft embarass themselves the same way SCO did? One thing's for sure, if Microsoft decides to play the patent game, they too are at risk of getting countersued for whatever patents they infringe (and based on how many software patents are out there, there's sure to be some).