That it is not yet necessary to migrate is irrelevant. One may argue with the time frame (next year or in five years or ten), but nobody denies that IPv6 will eventually become commonplace, and before most of us retire. That means it is now necessary for software to support IPv6. Writing a network-using program now that does not support IPv6 addresses is like storing the year in two digits in the nineties. It will come back to bite you.
If one wants to protest by infringing, it is possible to do so without making a profit along the way. Just upload it to BitTorrent. The moral high ground is shaky enough that way, but if the copyright infringer actually makes money from the violation, it's pretty much indefensible.
Ironically, with the tax breaks corporations get, they don't pay much of the bill either. Of course, they finance the government in a less direct way via campaign donations.
Addendum: As other comments have pointed out, TFA very explicitly states this only covers OEM installations, which TFS omits. The non-OEM software channel does not have this package.
The very first sign is whether the authors used the standard technology for scientific publication (TeX/LaTeX). This paper appears to be written in MS freakin' Word. I'm not saying it is impossible for a genius mathematician to be a publication newbie, but consider what is more likely:
1. Someone with no experience in scientific publication independently discovered a proof sought after for decades, which some have conjectured to be not even provable. 2. Somewhere in those hundred pages is an incorrect generalization, a hidden assumption, circular reasoning or one of dozens of other pitfalls a budding computer scientist or mathematician falls into while attempting a complex proof.
The sources aren't protected by law (and can't be) because the sources are far outside Swedish jurisdiction in any case. Swedish law cannot prevent the US military from prosecuting Bradley Manning for publishing documents. What the Swedish law is supposed to protect is their anonymity, by preventing an organization or the government from legally ordering Wikileaks to reveal the source (which doesn't help if the source is discovered independently, anyway).
Of course, if a source manages to contact Wikileaks without even Wikileaks knowing their identity, they're still mostly safe.
Slashdot Mirror
It's the GEZ. And yeah, they suck just as hard as the RIAA, but have more lobbying power. :(
Ironically, you'd think that after paying that ridiculous fee it would be legal to do what you've just paid for. Heh, no, they'll still sue you.
...
It has actually grown less effective, seeing as how so many people know how to write nowadays.
If it were up to the copyright lobby, owning a pen would be punishable by fines. :P
Also, they did 9/11 by crashing bicycles into the towers.
A wretched hive of scum and villainy!
That it is not yet necessary to migrate is irrelevant. One may argue with the time frame (next year or in five years or ten), but nobody denies that IPv6 will eventually become commonplace, and before most of us retire. That means it is now necessary for software to support IPv6. Writing a network-using program now that does not support IPv6 addresses is like storing the year in two digits in the nineties. It will come back to bite you.
Man, don't get me started on Eclipse. :P
If one wants to protest by infringing, it is possible to do so without making a profit along the way. Just upload it to BitTorrent. The moral high ground is shaky enough that way, but if the copyright infringer actually makes money from the violation, it's pretty much indefensible.
That's far too... likely.
No wacky conspiracy? I don't believe it. :P
Tentacle porn?
It concerns the violation of your right not to quarter squids on your computer. It's a little known unwritten addendum to the third amendment.
Rupert Murdoch appears to be the AOL of news media. It's a miracle he's still in business.
In part, this problem might be solved by DNSSEC.
NBN: Over 1000 Mega!
Abbott: O RLY?
NBN: YA RLY.
Abbott: NO WAI
NBN: WAI
Crap! Where's Gordon Freeman when you need him?
Well, they're only committing crimes if they get caught, so the solution the Pentagon is now going for is to make it a crime for anyone to catch them.
Ironically, with the tax breaks corporations get, they don't pay much of the bill either. Of course, they finance the government in a less direct way via campaign donations.
Addendum: As other comments have pointed out, TFA very explicitly states this only covers OEM installations, which TFS omits. The non-OEM software channel does not have this package.
I have Ubuntu 10.04 installed (with updated package databases), and there is no such package in the default repositories:
apt-cache show canonical-census
W: Unable to locate package canonical-census
E: No packages found
Heh...
Sure, if you feel okay with the idea of being a single damaged cell away from rapid uncontrollable tissue growth... :P
Scott Aaronson listed ten signs a mathematical breakthrough is wrong.
The very first sign is whether the authors used the standard technology for scientific publication (TeX/LaTeX). This paper appears to be written in MS freakin' Word. I'm not saying it is impossible for a genius mathematician to be a publication newbie, but consider what is more likely:
1. Someone with no experience in scientific publication independently discovered a proof sought after for decades, which some have conjectured to be not even provable.
2. Somewhere in those hundred pages is an incorrect generalization, a hidden assumption, circular reasoning or one of dozens of other pitfalls a budding computer scientist or mathematician falls into while attempting a complex proof.
Scott Aaronson unfortunately hasn't found the time yet to examine the paper closely, but he does bet 200k against its correctness.
But global warming is a lie by the liberals! It's all made up, Fox told me! How can this be happening?!
The sources aren't protected by law (and can't be) because the sources are far outside Swedish jurisdiction in any case. Swedish law cannot prevent the US military from prosecuting Bradley Manning for publishing documents. What the Swedish law is supposed to protect is their anonymity, by preventing an organization or the government from legally ordering Wikileaks to reveal the source (which doesn't help if the source is discovered independently, anyway).
Of course, if a source manages to contact Wikileaks without even Wikileaks knowing their identity, they're still mostly safe.
What is the problem? Do they get no retroactive protection?