And this is one reason it is so insensible when highly skilled software developers get worried over this idea that everyone is going to get some programming background.
As soon as it hits the fan--and it will--they'll need someone to fix it. And in many cases it will happen over and over and over again, and push costs higher than just hiring someone to do it right to begin with.
They obviously don't know how HTTP works. I issue a command on my computer that connects to their server. They voluntarily send me back some data and tell me what kind it is, so I can make a decision about what to do with it (i.e. render as a web site, interpret/run JS code, show it as plain text a la "view source", save the bytes to my hard drive, 3D-print the bytes as chew toys for my dog, etc.).
If you want to require my usage of the data that your server freely gives away to be constrained, then I need to sign a contract of some kind. Or you need to not send the data. But failing those options, what I do with data that you push to me is is my decision and not yours... if that means I selectively do not render your ads, then so be it.
Unless D-Link uses GPL software in such a way that they are bound to the copyleft terms of the GPL (e.g. they use portions of GPL-bound source code inside their own), as copyright holder they are free to distribute whatever portion they want, in any way they want, to whomever they want. It does not have to be the full software or any signing keys.
This is because the creator of the software is still the copyright holder, so they are the ones who would be a valid plaintiff to any copyright infringement lawsuit.
(But... I haven't done my research, it's possible that the exception I listed above applies in this case. If so, then whoever holds copyright to the portions of GPL'd code that were used would be able to file suit against D-Link.)
Maybe the people educating our youth shouldn't be basing their opinion of what is and isn't dangerous from Hollywood movies? Just a thought...
If they are teaching about circuit boards or bomb making, then absolutely not.
But if their job role is to teach kids to read while babysitting them to ensure they don't catch each other on fire, then it's clearly outside of their expertise. It's not like teachers are trained in ordnance recognition. So, it's best to make an educated guess that tends toward safety.
The problem here isn't that the teacher thought it might be a bomb. It's that there is blatant racism throughout every level of the system to the point that even when it was proven not to be a bomb, and even though the kid never even pretended that it was a bomb, they still want to charge him with a crime.
Are boys naturally more interested in STEM? Are girls more naturally interested in everything else?
If those are true for some biological reason, then great, we're right on track. But if it isn't, maybe we need to stop pushing each gender in society's preferred direction.
Patents and copyrights are ideas that are empowered by the Constitution, but they form tension with the First Amendment. They provide economic incentive to produce works, which helps increase the flow of ideas and expression... but only to a certain degree.
So far the ideal has been to balance the First Amendment with patents and copyrights. Whether this has been the most effective balance to achieve the goals of expression, I don't know.
Genetic engineering certainly has this component of expression, just like any invention or art. I don't think there is anything inherently wrong with genetic modification. But there are two areas I think that GMOs can become "bad":
1) GMOs are marketed as if they were the original organism (which I believe constitutes fraud) 2) GMOs produce an organism that is a threat to humans or our environment
Neither of those are freedom-of-expression violations, at least under the slight constraints we as a nation have agreed to place on those freedoms.
FWIW, I went to public school in Alabama and learned about evolution. It wasn't taught as in "but remember kids, this is only a theory" nor did they say "and evolution is fact and I'm failing you if you don't admit that God doesn't exist".
It was just taught. Like things of this nature should be.
I agree that wireless is ideal. If I can ever get the budget for it, I would love to go wireless for our whole setup.
I can find a multitude of large touch screen displays that make the iPad Pro look tiny, and then attach a capable PC with an OS that makes practically any setup possible (including wireless). Or a tablet with a 17" screen. Maybe even one of these. That's "pro" in my mind.
Sure, that's nice if your setup currently uses iPads. That doesn't really make this "pro" though. It's just a bigger screen. The iPad Pro doesn't actually have any more relevant functionality than the iPad Air 2.
I would expect a "pro" device to be able to add your lighting hardware as needed, and to be capable of utilizing specialized device drivers when the OS maker doesn't support your device out of the box. A Windows/Linux/Mac device could contain a PCI card that connects directly to a DMX cable, or utilize a USB adapter or RS232 adapter or several other mechanisms. An iPad Pro can't do any of that, it's just wireless. You need another device just to connect the wireless to the lights.
Your setup may be ideal in the long run, but to me a device is truly "pro" when it conforms to your setup instead of dictating it.
Ah yes, a deal with Dell is obviously the final straw...
Thank you, useless bot, who posts the same thing on every article related to Microsoft even if the comment actually has nothing to do with the topic at hand.
Perhaps parents whose recent photos of their child haven't yet been backed up? Someone who simply doesn't want to go through the hassle? Can we assume that quite a majority of users don't use their devices in the most perfectly organized manner possible?
"You should always be prepared to wipe" is not an excuse for the poor security that comes standard on many phones. I see tons of complaints here about how crappy the Apple and Microsoft walled-gardens are. Which I agree with. But instead of the same comments lambasting that approach, I'd like to see insightful conversations focusing on securing Android and making the iOS/Windows approaches more flexible.
I hope you aren't the IT manager at my company. If so, I'm leaving.
There's no way I'm going to work for a company whose IT manager has such a knee-jerk and uninformed reaction. If you truly believed Linux was the right tool for the job, you would have switched well before now for numerous other reasons. And you wouldn't be recommending an EOL operating system like XP. And for that matter you wouldn't be pirating any software, because that is about as unprofessional as you can get and you put your company at serious legal risk.
You really aren't an IT manager, you would know better. Either that or you are one of the guys that tend to show up in the stories on http://thedailywtf.com/.
It would be silly today to go after Microsoft for that kind of thing, when so many other companies in the computing/web technology space are blatantly guilty of the same or worse. Microsoft no longer has a monopoly related to consumer computing devices; the only real monopoly they still have is in the enterprise.
I'm quite interested to see what Apple is planning with the iPad Pro, but I would be surprised if it is more than just hardware bumps. Bigger screen, perhaps better specs, but no improvements to the OS that would make it particularly more useful in a professional environment than the current line of iPads.
Slashdot Mirror
So Systema is at fault for not securing the data, but the headline pins it on Amazon?
Oh, nice! So my app will be able to access the iPad's external USB storage, and display itself on my second monitor via the iPad's HDMI port?
And this is one reason it is so insensible when highly skilled software developers get worried over this idea that everyone is going to get some programming background.
As soon as it hits the fan--and it will--they'll need someone to fix it. And in many cases it will happen over and over and over again, and push costs higher than just hiring someone to do it right to begin with.
I'm not worried.
Define "own".
No prob
That didn't contradict what I said. It's just another reason the GPL would not cause them any issue.
They obviously don't know how HTTP works. I issue a command on my computer that connects to their server. They voluntarily send me back some data and tell me what kind it is, so I can make a decision about what to do with it (i.e. render as a web site, interpret/run JS code, show it as plain text a la "view source", save the bytes to my hard drive, 3D-print the bytes as chew toys for my dog, etc.).
If you want to require my usage of the data that your server freely gives away to be constrained, then I need to sign a contract of some kind. Or you need to not send the data. But failing those options, what I do with data that you push to me is is my decision and not yours... if that means I selectively do not render your ads, then so be it.
Unless D-Link uses GPL software in such a way that they are bound to the copyleft terms of the GPL (e.g. they use portions of GPL-bound source code inside their own), as copyright holder they are free to distribute whatever portion they want, in any way they want, to whomever they want. It does not have to be the full software or any signing keys.
This is because the creator of the software is still the copyright holder, so they are the ones who would be a valid plaintiff to any copyright infringement lawsuit.
(But... I haven't done my research, it's possible that the exception I listed above applies in this case. If so, then whoever holds copyright to the portions of GPL'd code that were used would be able to file suit against D-Link.)
Maybe the people educating our youth shouldn't be basing their opinion of what is and isn't dangerous from Hollywood movies? Just a thought...
If they are teaching about circuit boards or bomb making, then absolutely not.
But if their job role is to teach kids to read while babysitting them to ensure they don't catch each other on fire, then it's clearly outside of their expertise. It's not like teachers are trained in ordnance recognition. So, it's best to make an educated guess that tends toward safety.
The problem here isn't that the teacher thought it might be a bomb. It's that there is blatant racism throughout every level of the system to the point that even when it was proven not to be a bomb, and even though the kid never even pretended that it was a bomb, they still want to charge him with a crime.
Are boys naturally more interested in STEM? Are girls more naturally interested in everything else?
If those are true for some biological reason, then great, we're right on track. But if it isn't, maybe we need to stop pushing each gender in society's preferred direction.
There's no conflict. If you want to learn, parents can make a difference.
Also, parents can help convince you that you want to learn.
Patents and copyrights are ideas that are empowered by the Constitution, but they form tension with the First Amendment. They provide economic incentive to produce works, which helps increase the flow of ideas and expression... but only to a certain degree.
So far the ideal has been to balance the First Amendment with patents and copyrights. Whether this has been the most effective balance to achieve the goals of expression, I don't know.
Genetic engineering certainly has this component of expression, just like any invention or art. I don't think there is anything inherently wrong with genetic modification. But there are two areas I think that GMOs can become "bad":
1) GMOs are marketed as if they were the original organism (which I believe constitutes fraud)
2) GMOs produce an organism that is a threat to humans or our environment
Neither of those are freedom-of-expression violations, at least under the slight constraints we as a nation have agreed to place on those freedoms.
FWIW, I went to public school in Alabama and learned about evolution. It wasn't taught as in "but remember kids, this is only a theory" nor did they say "and evolution is fact and I'm failing you if you don't admit that God doesn't exist".
It was just taught. Like things of this nature should be.
And they'll ask you how many times you sued Internet ad companies.
Many folks who do not use ad blocking software use more than 5GB every month in just downloading ads.
You can download it and install it but it is not activated. It is still considered pirated.
I agree that wireless is ideal. If I can ever get the budget for it, I would love to go wireless for our whole setup.
I can find a multitude of large touch screen displays that make the iPad Pro look tiny, and then attach a capable PC with an OS that makes practically any setup possible (including wireless). Or a tablet with a 17" screen. Maybe even one of these. That's "pro" in my mind.
Sure, that's nice if your setup currently uses iPads. That doesn't really make this "pro" though. It's just a bigger screen. The iPad Pro doesn't actually have any more relevant functionality than the iPad Air 2.
I would expect a "pro" device to be able to add your lighting hardware as needed, and to be capable of utilizing specialized device drivers when the OS maker doesn't support your device out of the box. A Windows/Linux/Mac device could contain a PCI card that connects directly to a DMX cable, or utilize a USB adapter or RS232 adapter or several other mechanisms. An iPad Pro can't do any of that, it's just wireless. You need another device just to connect the wireless to the lights.
Your setup may be ideal in the long run, but to me a device is truly "pro" when it conforms to your setup instead of dictating it.
Ah yes, a deal with Dell is obviously the final straw...
Thank you, useless bot, who posts the same thing on every article related to Microsoft even if the comment actually has nothing to do with the topic at hand.
True, but I've heard these cases are pretty good.
I agree with all of that, with two exceptions:
1) force touch on the iPhone for activating contextual functionality (such as peek and context menus)
2) live photos
To be clear, the only one of those I care about is #1 but I could see a lot of people liking #2.
I don't see how a bigger screen and better performance suddenly make this oversized phone a professional tool.
Perhaps parents whose recent photos of their child haven't yet been backed up? Someone who simply doesn't want to go through the hassle? Can we assume that quite a majority of users don't use their devices in the most perfectly organized manner possible?
"You should always be prepared to wipe" is not an excuse for the poor security that comes standard on many phones. I see tons of complaints here about how crappy the Apple and Microsoft walled-gardens are. Which I agree with. But instead of the same comments lambasting that approach, I'd like to see insightful conversations focusing on securing Android and making the iOS/Windows approaches more flexible.
I hope you aren't the IT manager at my company. If so, I'm leaving.
There's no way I'm going to work for a company whose IT manager has such a knee-jerk and uninformed reaction. If you truly believed Linux was the right tool for the job, you would have switched well before now for numerous other reasons. And you wouldn't be recommending an EOL operating system like XP. And for that matter you wouldn't be pirating any software, because that is about as unprofessional as you can get and you put your company at serious legal risk.
You really aren't an IT manager, you would know better. Either that or you are one of the guys that tend to show up in the stories on http://thedailywtf.com/.
It would be silly today to go after Microsoft for that kind of thing, when so many other companies in the computing/web technology space are blatantly guilty of the same or worse. Microsoft no longer has a monopoly related to consumer computing devices; the only real monopoly they still have is in the enterprise.
I'm quite interested to see what Apple is planning with the iPad Pro, but I would be surprised if it is more than just hardware bumps. Bigger screen, perhaps better specs, but no improvements to the OS that would make it particularly more useful in a professional environment than the current line of iPads.