Comment Re:Ummmm.... (Score 1) 319
Heh, I used it for a project about 6 or 7 years ago. As far as I know, it's still around.
Heh, I used it for a project about 6 or 7 years ago. As far as I know, it's still around.
Flashblock in firefox has the option to block HTML5 video, too. And you've just reminded me to turn it on.
You could use GWT which is Java compiled to JS, then you're not touching JS directly (except by treating it as an assembly language.)
It's not native, true. But it's as native as C is to a regular OS environment.
Device driver writing is pretty niche. Wake me up when you can write a good web application in C.
So someone has given you something to use, for free. And you're saying that it's a problem because you don't want to return the favour? If you're going to be so selfish, then don't use it in the first place. Their condition for you to use it was that you help increase the amount of free software available in the world, and you're refusing to do that, and then blaming them because they want to do good, but you don't want to.
If you're going to do that, you might as well just go buy some proprietary libraries and use them and stay away from this whole free software world entirely, you don't really fit in at all.
Right, but since no one else can relicense your software and make a real project using it, it's only non-GPL'd software that's useful to working people. It's the non-GPL stuff that's more free in real usage.
Sorry, but that's stupid and wrong.
Where I work, we can only use free and open source software, preferably GPL. So by releasing your software as proprietary software, you're making it not useful to people like me who earn money by doing things with software.
There's no forcing to give back anything.
It's just that if you give the software to someone else, you have to also pass on the same rights that you got with it. How is that possibly a bad thing? To do anything else is selfish and antisocial.
I make money of GPLv3 software.
What was your actual point?
Last I heard (quite some years ago) the JVM didn't do it by default, as it was considered more important to keep stack traces intact. This might have changed now.
The Turing Test is a thought experiment. It's just saying "if you can talk to this, and can't tell if it's a person or a computer, then it doesn't matter: it's intellegent." It's not a method for a scientific, practical process. It's just something to think about when considering what might constitute intelligence.
Wow, that sounds bad.
I'm in the
Now, I only have one provider I can use via that cable, and they're not terrible. However I also have DSL as an option, and by law the copper and infrastructure provider can't be in the telecoms retail business. As such, I have no idea how many ISPs I could chose from. Dozens maybe.
The country is also getting fibre put down all over (the central city here has had it for years now through another provider, but now it's coming to houses), but it'll be a fair while before it gets to my place, just due to location. But, 50Mb cable will keep me happy until then.
People aren't perfect all the time, all it takes is one slip-up.
Really? How about you set your goalposts to be "whoever is stopping you getting the updates." Sometimes it's the carrier, sometimes it's the hardware provider, sometimes (if you're on a nexus) it's Google. Blaming the appropriate party isn't moving goalposts, it just not being stupid.
Because TI don't support some of the hardware in it, so they can't get new drivers for it. That hardware contract should have had more of a support length built into it.
It is the hardware provider in much of the world. If you have shitty carriers, blame the shitty carriers. Otherwise, blame the hardware providers.
"Your mother was a hamster, and your father smelt of elderberrys!" -- Monty Python and the Holy Grail