They aren't entirely pointless. They force new developers to give credit to those that came before. I figure this is what a university is most interested in (i.e. their reputation).

Putting aside your whining about being unable to monetize your changes to someone else's code, I think you can expect a relatively permissive license. In TFA, EditShare mentions they intend to let developers sell plug-ins and such. While some device drivers demonstrate you can make binary blobs interact with GPL code, I imagine it would make things much simpler if they stuck with a BSD or MIT license.

Yes, and now you have a thoroughly subsidized monocultural food production system which breeds antibiotic-resistant bacteria and outputs decidely non-nutritious food at its most affordable levels; and the abusive working conditions you decry have simply been moved offshore, leaving the corporations who contract for such cheap labor to enforce our enlightened norms, if they feel like it. The moneyed interests which benefit from these arrangements have much more influence over the people in power than do you, the single voter. So while these problems may, eventually, be addressed by the government, it will not happen until they are almost catastrophes. This is the downside to such a heavily centralized republic.

I don't know about how brazen the RIAA is, but as far as I can tell, the Court ruled them statutory damages--There was a table with each song on a row and a column titled "Statutory Damages Award," and written in each box was 22,500.00 (source). If they thought they were handing down a punishment, well, they picked the wrong box. While I agree with you that tens of thousands in compensation for each song is ridiculous, that's how the fools ruled.

Disclaimer: IANAL.

It's not being twisted around, honestly. Perhaps the intent was to prevent the injustices we're talking about now, but that isn't how it was written. The RIAA seeks what it sees as damages, at least ostensibly; this is compensation, not punishment. Even if this were a criminal trial, it would be foolhardy to use the eighth amendment to attack awards for statutory damages. Totally different story if we're talking about a fine.

And that's why they're talking about due process instead. I'm not sure how that works (certainly didn't read the brief), but it sounds logical to me.

Ah, but you're making a mistake. It may be cruel and unusual, but it is not punishment. Therefore, the eighth amendment does not apply. ;)

Scalia made a similar argument against the unconstitutionality of torture. It was brilliant! And someone should probably reword the eighth amendment...

One question... why? I bet your prejudices are based on very outdated information.

I've used yum, zypper, apt, and pacman based systems before, and I don't see any significant differences in the packaging format's power. Repositories are often set up a bit differently, but that's a policy issue. What is this major feature DEB has that RPM doesn't? Or even that apt has that yum doesn't?

I figured netbooks were positioned between handhelds and notebooks... but if you're going to include the DSi, perhaps the Pandora would be a better answer for that. They may actually start shipping sometime this year... ;)

They're working with their contractor to perfect the case moulds right now, and the rest of the components are supposedly together, ready for assembly. I'm not qualified to judge, but it sounds like they aren't far off. Too bad ordering is a snafu.

It's also important to know the entry-level requirements of the field you want to work in. I made a mistake when I graduated in May; I thought I could find a job in digital systems design/verification (centering at the RTL level). It turns out that only the government looks at someone without a Master's degree.

The appeal in CoD for me was very much gameplay-related. Thus far, MW (not MW2) struck the best balance between realism and the arcade for its niche. Though each of them had flaws, its standout points were reasonable recoil, map designs that usually provided ample cover, and a pace that wasn't ridiculously fast (Unreal Tournament) or slow (Ghost Recon). In short, it seemed like the beginning of a FPS series that would encourage squad-level tactics without taking you far from the shooting.

Sadly, that balance shifted immediately towards the arcade side with the very next game (CoD 5), making its gameplay just like every other.

What if the tech is used on a character who's supposed to look slightly inhuman? I'm thinking chiefly of Data from Star Trek, whom Brent Spiner has said he will never play again since an immortal android doesn't age. But if you could reset his looks to 1987, while also setting the character further apart from the normal humans surrounding him, I think that would be an enhancement rather than a drawback.

Just thought I'd let you know.

It's really a silly argument. The BSD license does have fewer restrictions, but that doesn't make it better than the other. I think people need to understand that the two licenses have different goals in mind, and developers need to respect the wishes of the rights holder. Likewise, developers should take care in what license they use.

My guess is that the BSD license's intent was to simply give credit where credit was due and to allow researchers to develop code for anyone to use, in proprietary or open source projects, with limited liability. This is a good license to choose if you want to give your code away and only want recognition.

The GPL's intent should be obvious to everyone here: The FSF is after a system entirely composed of open source software, and the GPL is one of their tools to achieve it. If you do not want to be a part of this community, do not license your software as GPL and do not expect to be able to use someone else's GPL code (in your own code). If you don't like it, tough--you may as well be complaining to a car salesman about your car not being free.

But if you hate the GPL and FSF, you might not want to use the BSD license. They can use your code too. ;)

I don't think that's quite a fair assertion to make. Local elected officials' hands are generally tied by policies set at the national and state levels. California is a strong example of this. Someone up above mentioned the extreme imbalance of tax payments made to the federal government vs. returns received. And I have experienced firsthand the enforced impotence of well-meaning school district officials in repairing severely outdated school plants due to positively Byzantine and constantly shifting state funding rules (which are typically rigged to benefit huge districts like Los Angeles). These are but two examples. The social engineering policies that define our society are set at the highest levels, and the power brokers at those levels do indeed come from an elite background or are validated by the elites who control the political and financial machinery. Populists and guys next door can make it to national office, usually in the House of Representatives, but they quickly learn to toe their party's line or be marginalized.

The American republic may have a system vaguely resembling democracy, but it is hardly participatory, and that is where the populist rage you decry comes from. It is especially intensified by the ease of individual interconnectivity that modern information technology enables. As these interconnected individuals come to feel more disempowered, their rhetoric becomes more intense. The same thing happened with liberals under Bush.