I think you meant GPL2 3(b), but I stand corrected. You have to make a written offer valid for 3 years from the date of your original distribution. I am not sure how this would be enforced if the first party is the original author, as the only person who can legally force the first party to comply is the copyright owner, (such as in this current discussion). I'm not even sure how you could prove the date of the original distribution (1st party to 2nd party), making this a difficult provision to enforce. It can't possibly mean 3 years from the distribution from 2nd party to 3rd party, as that could take place 5 years after the 1st party to 2nd party distribution.

This means that *technically*, the original author can be in violation of his own license, by simply refusing to provide source to a third party.

"You see, that is why you do not ask the Moon!"
"Listen, I took a chance, all right? We asked the Moon, I didn't know he was an alabaster retard, did I?"

Ever heard of misdirection? Guess not. Hey, what's that over there?

It is less of a concern in stationary installations, but you have to compress the gas, and since we're using methane as a comparison, it's dramatically easier to store methane simply because it's a larger molecule, and it's easier to use due to lack of problems with hydrogen embrittlement. You can convert existing gasoline engines to run on methane, though nobody does because it's not sufficiently available. Instead, they do it with propane, from which the difference is probably a re-jetting, or perhaps a change in working pressure. But converting existing engines to hydrogen would fail because the metals are not treated to resist embrittlement, and extended use would lead to engine destruction. Presumably, valves would go first, and frequently.

The simple truth is that hydrogen is not a satisfactory energy storage mechanism until we figure out how to better store it. And it's looking more and more like the storage mechanism is going to be something with a lot of surface area rather than an empty tank. That means more mass overall, further reducing the potential lead of hydrogen over batteries. Given that practical fuel cells are perpetually 5-10 years away, the total efficiency of a system using hydrogen today would be extremely poor due to the use of an internal combustion engine, and since hydrogen engines are in their infancy compared to gasoline or diesel engines, they could be expected to be highly unreliable for a time.

Or in short, it makes far more sense to make biodiesel right now than to do anything else. In the medium term, perhaps full-EVs will be the best value proposition for most people; If the Nissan LEAF takes off it could bring about real change. Maybe in twenty or thirty years we can use hydrogen.

I thought we all recognized this when they shut down the Zone. At least with DirectPlay games, you can run your own matchmaking service if you want. God help us when they shut down Games For Windows Live and 6 or 7 years of console ports die. I never buy a game now unless it runs on the standard QuakeWorld model - CD key auth, master server, dedicated user-run servers.

Given that we're talking about America here, land of the "left wing, right wing, what the fuck is the middle," probably not. All we can hope for is that there's enough of a pissing contest between opposing sides of an issue for them to have to compromise begrudgingly. It's slow doing things that way but at least it works...mostly.

I have to agree with drinky, here, especially as a spiritual/religious (in that order, I might add) person. The whole CONCEPT of a spiritual body surviving a physical one (prevalent in many religions and I'm assuming theirs as well) relies on the dead person not needing the body anymore. Thus if you bury my body somewhere and a hundred years later it turns out that'd be a kick-ass place to build something to help quite a few people *I'm* not going to care. By all means, please uproot what's left of my corpse, I think you've done me enough courtesy already.

And think about it this way. Suppose it's true for a minute that the spirit survives the body and you've now buried the dead person's corpse. While it's nice to leave it alone for a few weeks/months in reverence do these people seriously think the dead have nothing better to do than hang around their own decomposing corpses? Really? That's what they think? For fuck's sake I think the dead even in the WORST case have better things to do.

Grrr Assuming I'm not missing something about their argument people like this using religion as a shield to piss on other people's parade, in this case PROGRESS, really piss nice, reasonable folks like myself off.

Fool you three or more times, you must be an Apple customer. ;)

That...would be AWESOME.

Oh I dunno, I thought it was pretty obvious what caused cancer. Just make sure you're not born at the end of June.

Checks birthday

Oh shit.

Aw I dunno about that. But then again it's important to remember that nobody gets out of this alive. ;)

If it makes you feel better remember that not everyone can be a cancer researcher. That's okay though, they couldn't really do their jobs very well without a place to put the junk they discard in their search. :)

But I find stories like the grandparent are the reason why this research is freakin IMPORTANT. Nobody should have to go through that, and I wish there was more I could do to help. At the same time, you folks that keep surviving against all odds give me hope, not just for myself (had a few cancer scares myself, but nothing malignant), but that LIFE continues even in the face of oblivion. Not giving up, not giving in...well, it gives me hope somehow, hope that it's not all just pointless, that life is too damned important to give up on.

Ah well, sorry for not contributing much. Had to say something. Thanks you folks that keep fighting, me and my wife are rooting for you.

Mod parent up. In a situation like this, hard as it is to believe on Slashdot, mistakes happen. ROE can be not what you expect, and as noted earlier you simply don't know. I always thought the concept of places like this was to hold things in doubt, not to jump onto a bandwagon.

From my wife's experience in the Air Force she had to man the machine-gun pit in front of her Air Base out in Iraq. Her orders were that if anyone stepped beyond the signs she'd shout a single warning. If the person, man, woman, child, car, whomever did not stop, turn around, or otherwise, she was supposed to blow them to kingdom come. Mercifully she never had to, but consider the following:

Same scenario, area is set up as a kill zone. Large group of journalists with cameras walk down the road. She shouts a warning to turn around, they don't heed it (maybe they don't speak English, doesn't matter why). Insert video of blowing away unarmed journalists on a street from a machine gun pit. A van rolls into the kill zone, also does not heed the warning, ALSO gets blasted to Hell and back. What the video would never show you are her orders, the kill zone perimeter warnings, or the situation (in this case extremely hostile area, heavily fortified entrance, no expected visitors except at specific times during which that would not be one of them, so on and so forth).

Now you the viewer know nothing beyond what you've seen. You can make any assumption you want, but the fact is that a video of that doesn't tell you anything beyond a fact, not the WHY it happened. It's appalling, but not for the reasons you'd imagine.


Again, mod the parent up. Why were people blown away? We DO NOT KNOW. What we DO know is that it was covered up by those who shouldn't be covering it up. Now THAT is appalling and deserves a lot of investigation. What were the troops' orders? Who GAVE those orders? Was this a clearly designated kill zone? Was a large group of people with cameras (and later a van dropping in) viewed as a threat? If so, why? Who noted it was a threat? These are the kinds of questions we need answers to first.

It's appalling, yes, but I find covering it up more appalling. If it's a screw-up it's a screw-up and we take it from there. If it's NOT a screw-up then we need to know that, too. We need more info, IMHO. But hey, I could be wrong, maybe our military is just chock full of ruthless barbarians going rogue and itching to kill people. From meeting quite a few of said barbarians I don't think that's true, so I'd like more info first.