If you don't actually own the rights to what you are writing, please don't contaminate open source projects by including code owned by your employer.

Cleaning up a contaminated code base is a big pain. Please make sure you own the code, or have the rights to release it before setting it free.

You should have negotiated this before you started employment.

Once, when I objected to terms that would have granted the company ownership over everything I did outside of work, they just swapped out that page with another one they had ready. The different terms were there and ready, but just not the default. They were perfectly happy to give me the rights to my own projects, as long as I was willing to ask for them.

It does suck when you didn't pay attention to what you signed, and are stuck in a bad situation, and it can be hard to fix these things after the fact.

Your best option would probably to look for another job, and pay attention to what they are asking you to sign.

Hopefully you don't have any long term non-competes, or other clauses.

My guess would be memory fragmentation; Firefox requests and releases pools of memory from the OS rather than making OS level requests every time it needs memory, and unless a pool is completely unused, it can't be released.

So there is some additional overhead of space that is free for use by new internal requests, but can not be released back to the OS.

The general opinion is that the LGPL bars distribution of a statically linked binary containing non-GPL family code combined with LGPL code.

You might be able to get away with providing object code for both your binary and the library, but that makes RMS sad.

Nope ; the critical point for Nitrogen is 126.19 K at 3.3978 MPa.

No matter what pressure it is, you have to keep it below -146.96 C ( -232.52800 F, 227.14200 Ra ) if you want to keep it from evaporating.

X0 was the shortest text output from the modem; I usually went for the opposite extreme with X4, so it would log everything while it was connecting.

I remember that for a while my lines were in horrible shape, so I would use s7=255 to disable the dropout detection, and ride out the line noise.

Material for which no source can be found should be validated the same way you would verify any other data. A minute or two of searching can usually locate sources. The reader can update the page to include the source, or delete the offending statement if no verification appears to exist.

This is the constructive way to handle the issue. To blindly delete without attempting to validate is simply vandalism.

There are lots of people who auto revert every change they see, in order to get their own change count up.

I gave up on Wikipedia after a struggle to get an entry for a local hiking trail updated with correct information; the article cited a several year old blog post about parts being closed for construction.

Every time I updated the entry to indicate that the trail was open (as the construction had finished years ago), and changed the references to point to current news articles and recent blog postings, it would be reverted within minutes by the same user.

Small primes are even better.

There is an ATA command called "TRIM". If a device supports it, the OS can tell it that a group of sectors is no longer needed, and should be wiped.

The core of the old "blue amberol" cylinders is made of plaster of Paris, and gradually expands over time as it absorbs water.

That will eventually happen to all of the old cylinders. The pressure will become too great, and they will shatter.

The IRS does pay interest, if they owe you enough.

I found this out last year after a brokerage mixup resulted in a rather large refund; I was pleasantly surprised when they sent me a check and statement for the interest on the amount they owed me.

FYI: the IRS does pay interest if they owe you enough.

I had a mixup with unneeded backup withholding being withheld from the total proceeds of a stock sale, so I had a rather large refund last year.

I was pleasantly surprised to receive an additional check and statement in the mail shortly after I filed my return.

The statement said that the additional payment was for interest, and the IRS sent me a 1099G for the interest this year.

Actually it's not necessarily an interest free loan.

I had a rather complicated tax situation last year, and as part of it, I ended up massively overpaying, and then claiming back the overpayment. I'm not sure what the threshold is, but there was a line item for "Interest Paid" on the statement, and the IRS actually paid pretty decent interest for the couple of months they had my money.

I'm also amused by the letter I got from the IRS the other day reminding me to declare the interest they paid me. I may frame it.