The Technican Element 3 test wasn't more difficult than the Novice Element 1 and 2 together, so Technican became the lowest license class when they stopped having to take Element 1.
The change to 13 WPM was in 1936, and was specifically to reduce the number of Amateur applicants. It was 10 WPM before that. ARRL asked for 12.5 WPM in their filing, FCC rounded the number because they felt it would be difficult to set 12.5 on the Instructograph and other equipment available for code practice at the time.
It was meant to keep otherwise-worthy hams out of the hobby. And then we let that requirement keep going for 60 years.
The Indianapolis cop episode was back in 2009. It wasn't the first time we've had intruders, and won't be the last, and if you have to reach back that long for an example, the situation can't be that bad. It had nothing to do with code rules or NGOs getting their operators licenses.
A satphone is less expensive than a trained HF operator. Iridium costs $30 per month and $0.89 per minute to call another Iridium phone. That's the over-the-counter rate. Government agencies get a better rate than that. And the phone costs $1100, again that's retail not the government rate, less than an HF rig with antenna and tower will cost any public agency to install.
You think it's a big deal to lobby against paid operators because there will be objections? How difficult do you think it was to reform the code regulations? Don't you think there were lots of opposing comments?
And you don't care about young people getting into Amateur Radio. That's non-survival thinking.
Fortunately, when the real hams go to get something done, folks like you aren't hard to fight, because you don't really do much other than whine and send in the occassional FCC comment. Do you know I even spoke in Iceland when I was lobbying against the code rules? Their IARU vote had the same power as that of the U.S., and half of the hams in the country came to see me. That's how you make real change.
not wrong. the post i was replying to was this:
> Another version of
which is wrong.
since 4.6 REPLACES 4.5, there's no additional patches to install.
ongoing, you either install the 4.5 patches, OR the 4.6 ones. not both.
i feel sorry for whoever hired you that you still don't understand that, and you're supposedly responsible for so many systems. and what's worse, i have explained it to you several times and you still refuse (probably out of some ignorant pride) to accept your misunderstanding. actually, since you're responsible for running bulk windows updates, i'm not entirely surprised...
Warhol's Entitlement isn't just for people anymore.
Yeah and that AC was responding to MM'S post about increased update times:
http://slashdot.org/comments.p...
Which was marked as insightful insightful even though it's patently false.
So at that point my comment was on-topic and yours are still way off.
So basically you don't understand two things:
1) that
2) how to follow thread ancestry on Slashdot.
Yep, there are a lot of flashing lights and beeps sending code in the computer world. I still hear phones using "... --
OpenSSL has first-to-market advantage, and anyone who hasn't evaluated the quality differences will choose the simpler license. Plus there are other alternatives, like Amazon's new SSL-in-5000-lines which is also gift-licensed.
The time for OpenSSL to dual-license was when it was the only available alternative to entirely proprietary implementations. That might indeed have funded a quality improvement.
I don't know a thing about the quality of GnuTLS or the Amazon thing. I've seen enough of the insides of OpenSSL to know it's not pretty, but am not a crypto guy and this don't work on it.
Maintaining FIPS compliance did not make anything easier. It's essentially a prohibition on bug repair, as you have to recertify afterward. But the people who wanted FIPS were the only ones who were actually paying for someone to work on OpenSSL.
I don't think any of the other Free Software projects ever tried to be FIPS certified.
If you are one of the infringed parties, I'd be happy to talk with you about what your options are. bruce at perens dot com or +1 510-4PERENS (I'm not there today, but it will take a message). I am not a lawyer but I work with the good ones and can bring them into the conversation if necessary.
As a community we've managed to almost completely ignore that because of their use of dual-licensing, MySQL made 1.1 Billion dollars after 9 years in business, and that for a database that was written by one person, and the code base remained available under the GPL.
IMO, 1.1 Billion dollars is pretty damn impressive. Especially if you get paid that to make Free Software. Heck, sign me up!
Oracle was a bad actor, and Monty is now leading further development of that same code base under the GPL. But it did not have to be that way.
How do you prove damages or have the right to settle violations if you don't have copyright?
If you have been doing enough work to justify getting paid for the software, you have an ample amount of your own copyrighted work to base your claim upon. If you haven't done that much work, what are you suing for?
You can also get a grant of the right to sue from your contributors. You can include in the agreement how you will apportion damages: for example you could take the ratio of your lines of modified code checked in vs. that of contributed code checked in, and give that portion of damages to FSF.
electrical arcing of instruments
electrical arcing of instruments?
electrical ARCING of instruments?
No thanks, I'll take chances with Roberto. He may be crazy, but he just wants to stab you, not stab and electrocute you.
We have a equal opportunity Calculus class -- it's fully integrated.
