Getting out of sync isn't an issue. Anything that uses rolling codes generally creates look-ahead codes to prevent this. This is how current garage door openers handle the accidental hitting of the transmitter button when out of range.
Hmmm,
Guess I misunderstood. I've thought for a long time now that all changes must be sent back. At a previous company, I made some changes to software under GPL in order to make it useful for us in-house. I then went on to convice the management that the changes had to be submitted back to the original author before we could use them. I was affraid that someday some FSF lawyer could find the altered code and raise an issue. This whole situation was a rediculuous fiasco. The management team was afraid that someone could gleen our IP concept from the changes I had made and didn't want to release it.
So, does using the changed software in-house (5 designers) count as "re-distribute"? Or, would it only have mattered if the software made it into our product (which was actually a piece of hardware)? If the later is the case, then I could have saved myself a headache. Oh well, live and learn.
Then again, on the topic of the original post....
The school would have a hard time knowing what changes were redistributed and therefore what needs to be made available. I don't know if this would be a school issue, or an issue for the user making the changes. I really wonder if some student hacking at the kernel, and distributing to his friends, could potentially cause GPL conflicts for the school.
Wouldn't the schools also have to keep there ducks in row if using Linux under GPL? They would need to make sure that there are no modified kernels or other software that hasn't been submitted back.
Granted the likelyhood of anyone comming after them for it is way low. But, in order to follow the letter-of-the-law, they would have to be just as careful, and possibly spend just as much on this effort.
This is simply the way technology works. From the begginning the web has been needing speed upgrades because of its content. And once the speed catches up to support the newest content, the content evolves and requires greater speed. Why worry about this natural process of innovation. If content is limited out of bandwidth concerns, then bandwidth won't improve.
"Allowing any user to load and install any application or hardware accessory" is one of the pitfalls of Windows. Why would Linux want to adopt that flawed idea? I think Windows could benefit from adopting the mentality of asking for an admin password only when needed.
(Before someone points it out, I know that the problem WRT Windows is more the fault of the applications than the OS, but MS apps are guilty too.)
As far a the eye candy factor being the last issue, again look at the success of Windows. Do you think they got everything right and worried last about how it looked? I don't think so. To non-/.'s to use Linux, it's going to have to look pretty, and minimize the CLI need. I think Ubuntu has gone a long way toward this, but there's still a lot of work ahead, judging by my wife's reaction to it (she's definately a non-/.).
Slashdot Mirror
Getting out of sync isn't an issue. Anything that uses rolling codes generally creates look-ahead codes to prevent this. This is how current garage door openers handle the accidental hitting of the transmitter button when out of range.
Wow, thanks!
I completely mis-understood it then. Guess I should have spent more time reading the terms.
Hmmm,
Guess I misunderstood. I've thought for a long time now that all changes must be sent back. At a previous company, I made some changes to software under GPL in order to make it useful for us in-house. I then went on to convice the management that the changes had to be submitted back to the original author before we could use them. I was affraid that someday some FSF lawyer could find the altered code and raise an issue. This whole situation was a rediculuous fiasco. The management team was afraid that someone could gleen our IP concept from the changes I had made and didn't want to release it.
So, does using the changed software in-house (5 designers) count as "re-distribute"? Or, would it only have mattered if the software made it into our product (which was actually a piece of hardware)? If the later is the case, then I could have saved myself a headache. Oh well, live and learn.
Then again, on the topic of the original post.... The school would have a hard time knowing what changes were redistributed and therefore what needs to be made available. I don't know if this would be a school issue, or an issue for the user making the changes. I really wonder if some student hacking at the kernel, and distributing to his friends, could potentially cause GPL conflicts for the school.
Just to play devil's advocate on this one.....
Wouldn't the schools also have to keep there ducks in row if using Linux under GPL? They would need to make sure that there are no modified kernels or other software that hasn't been submitted back.
Granted the likelyhood of anyone comming after them for it is way low. But, in order to follow the letter-of-the-law, they would have to be just as careful, and possibly spend just as much on this effort.
This is simply the way technology works. From the begginning the web has been needing speed upgrades because of its content. And once the speed catches up to support the newest content, the content evolves and requires greater speed. Why worry about this natural process of innovation. If content is limited out of bandwidth concerns, then bandwidth won't improve.
"Allowing any user to load and install any application or hardware accessory" is one of the pitfalls of Windows. Why would Linux want to adopt that flawed idea? I think Windows could benefit from adopting the mentality of asking for an admin password only when needed. (Before someone points it out, I know that the problem WRT Windows is more the fault of the applications than the OS, but MS apps are guilty too.) As far a the eye candy factor being the last issue, again look at the success of Windows. Do you think they got everything right and worried last about how it looked? I don't think so. To non-/.'s to use Linux, it's going to have to look pretty, and minimize the CLI need. I think Ubuntu has gone a long way toward this, but there's still a lot of work ahead, judging by my wife's reaction to it (she's definately a non-/.).