Slashdot is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×

Comment Re:2nd phone (Score 1) 364

Right, because taking away a sliver of plastic will totally stop someone from driving. Just look at the stats for "driving without a license". Any technology put in the phone that can be selectively enabled (read: enabled by court order) can be disabled. And good luck getting Cyanogen to add that brain damage to the image. Plus, it's only the **DRIVER** who must be stopped; everyone else in the car is perfectly OK to text while in motion, but such technologies stop them too.

Comment Re:Holy cow ... (Score 0) 142

Most commonly they were simply routed around.

OK, maybe I made that sound more simple than it was. When every route is covered by 'bandits' of one stripe or another, 'just route around' is easier said than done... but, what happened is that the bandits started competing.

There were two routes that could be taken to market, each harbored a different gang. One year, gang A simply took everything that tried to pass. Big gains for them that year. The same year, gang B was a little more restrained, and only 'taxed' caravans but let them go on through after coughing up a fee. Their gains were smaller that year, but the next year, caravans came through their territory and contributd to their coffers again. Gang A's territory received no merchants. Gang A got no gain from this, and would see no gains from it again for a decade or more, until they were finally driven out by a new gang which behaved differently. Gang B, on the other hand, gained more than the first year, as they now had all the traffic rather than half of it passing through their territory.

And thus was born taxation. Eco-friendly theft, sustainable banditry. The first guy to try it was no doubt considered an imbecile by his peers, at first, but it soon proved to be an advantage that only increases over time and the taxers not only held on but soon enough put the old-school bandits at a permanent disadvantage that continues to this day.

And so over time the taxer chiefs became Barons, and the Baronies were organized into Kingdoms, and the Kingdoms into Empires, and the the Empires fell apart into Baronies and Kingdoms again, a cycle that in some older areas has probably repeated a dozen times, and then after much time all of these groups were swept away by the new secular religion of nationalism, and Nations were invented to replace them. But the scam remains essentially the same regardless of the time and place.

How would that translate today? Well if we could get a clear corridor through the country of jurisdictions that repudiated this and other forms of robbery clearly, a lot of travellers would be willing to detour significantly in order to remain within that corridor. The jurisdictions that continued the robbery would, like gang A, effectively be cut out of the game, and even though travellers would make it through with most of their belongings each one would certainly drop a few dollars in taxes on these jurisdictions as they passed through. But getting the ball rolling, getting the initial free corridor on line, I got nothing practical on that at the moment, I am sorry.

It probably was not easy to do that the first time around either though. We may have existed as a species for a couple of hundred thousand years before we actually progressed to the point where travelling more than a few miles did not involve a likelihood of mortal combat to begin with.

Comment Re:Science creates understanding of a real world. (Score 1, Insightful) 770

"The global warming people haven't shown us the value of anything, so far as I can see."

That's because your definition of value and theirs are different.

Their work has inestimable value - both in terms of promoting their own careers, and their own political and pseudoreligious goals.

The fact that it does not serve YOUR goals is not really their concern, now is it?

Comment Re:ELI5 please (Score 0) 354

That appears to be the matter in dispute. There are many posters on the company blog saying "what's this then?" and making it a link. When I follow the link, I get a notice saying it's been removed due to DMCA notice.

It's my understanding that *if* this company owns the original code, and included it, in binary or source, with the GPA build, which they then shipped, they have either invoked the license or they are violating his copyright. And it appears the company is saying they did not do this but a lot of users are saying they sure did. At this point, since they have taken whatever was being linked to down, I cannot tell for sure.

Comment Re:ELI5 please (Score 4, Informative) 354

It's a little more complicated than that.

You didnt just write some GPL piece of software for windows, you wrote some GPL software that is so tightly integrated with Windows you actually had to reverse engineer parts of Windows and replace original system files with new ones, composed in part of what we think of as your program, and in part of your reverse-engineered best guess on the original Windows system code. Probably problematic to distributed, if Microsoft had cared, but it was boosting their sales so they didnt raise any fuss. In fact, they turned around and bought out your company instead. Took over operations, but critically did not receive the copyright to this GPL software (which was always, if I am not mistaken, owned by the contributors, not the company.)

This is where it gets tricky. Now THEY are the ones distributing your GPL code linked to their own code, not your reverse-engineered stand-in. I am not 100% sure I am getting that part correct, but it seems to be the case. And if it is the case... then at that point Microsoft would actually be in violation of your license. They would have, as I see it, three options. They could simply quit using your code entirely, which they obviously do not want to do, and which would only prevent continuing violations but still leave them at least theoretically liable for past damages; they could GPL Windows itself, and use your code freely; or they could purchase either copyright or a side-license to continue using the code outside the GPL.

Comment Re:When (Score 0) 110

"Software is math but you could also say the same about anything that was ever invented."

No, you could not.

At least not truthfully.

Everything *can be described* using math but not everything *is* math.

On the other hand, everything a computer can do, is math.

Physical changes, excluding electrical changes which signify numbers? Zero, none, nada.

Your printer puts ink on paper? Yes it does. In response to a number calculated and sent to it by the computer. The screen shows pictures? Yes it does - in response to numbers calculated and sent to it by the computer.

Everything a computer does, is math, period.

Comment Re:When (Score 1, Insightful) 110

Unfortunately that is blocked indefinitely by the failure of the court system to understand that software is math. I used to expect the next generation of judges at least would get it, but seeing a whole new generation coming out that is even less technically savvy than their predecessors kind of dashes that hope.

Comment Re:From the linked article... (Score 1) 463

Then part (e) needs to be removed or amended. There's a very good reason "texting while driving" is illegal pretty much everywhere: it's fucking dangerous. If he needed to respond "immediately" then he should've pulled the damned car over.

(Also note, in NC cops can be assholes and write you a ticket if the car is on but in park because you are still technically "operating" a vehicle.)

Comment Re:What is it? (Score 1) 826

"it does seem to me to *sort of* be outside of the "do one very specific thing well"."

I could agree with that, my emphasis added. It seems like a drastic reduction from the charge you originally leveled. 'Email' is actually a fairly complicated thing requiring a fairly complicated toolset, after all. You mention an editor as something different (and it is) but no email program could function without some editor at least. And usenet is extremely similar to email in terms of the toolset required. You *could* do all this by piping different tools together on the fly and you *could* argue that's the only twue unix way but it's stretching a pretty thin point way too far when you equate Alpine with Outlook.

Slashdot Top Deals

Real Programmers don't eat quiche. They eat Twinkies and Szechwan food.

Working...